Deeper Commentary
1 John 2
2:1 My little children, these things write I to you, so you may not sin. And if anyone sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous- Advice how not to sin cannot simply be 'keep the commandments' which follows in :3,4. It could be argued that a spirit of obedience to Divine commandments leads us to progressively greater strength against sin. But I suggest on :3,18 that this is a plural of majesty referring to the one great, new commandment- to love as the Lord loved us on the cross. A total focus upon living like this will be the strength to generally not sin in life. But John accepts we will not fully get there- and in this case, we do have an advocate with the Father.
As explained on 1:8-10, John was teaching that
if we are focused on the light of the Lord Jesus and have the Comforter
abiding within us, then "all [our] sin" is dealt with in the Lord Jesus.
But this is not to say that we will not sin; indeed, it is the presence of
the "truth", the "spirit of truth", the Comforter within us which convicts
us of sin. And now he alludes to the same thing, saying that we have a
parakletos with the Father, the Lord Jesus, "the
righteous", and we are counted as in Him, His righteousness imputed to us.
The Comforter refers to the Spirit of Christ within us which means that we
have the Lord's presence with us to more than compensate for His physical
absence. The same Lord who is within us convicting us of sin is the same
Lord who is now in Heaven to obtain our total forgiveness. This way of
thinking and being means that we will find the power not to sin. "These
things" John has just written at the end of chapter 1 are the way not to
sin; to not as it were worry about avoiding sin, but rather to positively
focus upon the presence of the Lord within us, allowing Him to convict us
of our sin and deal with it in His own way.
The Comforter passages assure us that we need no mediator because the
Father Himself loves us, and the spirit of His Son is within us so that we
can directly relate to Him as the Son did and does with the Father. The
later NT passages concerning prayer and mediation therefore speak largely
in the context of prayer for forgiveness and salvation (1 Tim. 2:5; Heb.
7:25; 1 Jn. 2:1). This is what the Lord's mediation / advocacy for us
achieves, rather than acting as a constant go-between for us with the
Father in the context of our regular prayers for other things.
2:2- see on 2 Cor. 5:19.
And he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world- As discussed above, "our sins" are essentially our failure to keep the "commandment[s]" of loving as the Lord loved us.
As noted on :1, the passages
concerning the Lord as our mediator are all in the context of Him asking
for our forgiveness, as the High Priest sought Israel's forgiveness on the
day of Atonement. On the cross He was there the propitiation for our sins,
and yet He is that now, each time we sin (1 Jn. 2:1; 4:10). The cross is
ongoing, in essence. The simple fact is that the Lord Jesus died as the
antitype of the guilt offering. He died to take away guilt… and he or she
who truly believes that has no need to transfer or discharge their guilt
in these ways. The guilt of our iniquity was laid upon the Lord Jesus upon
the cross, He there was the expiation of our sins (1 Jn. 2:2)… we don’t
have to vainly try to transfer it onto anyone else, or use any other way
of dealing with that guilt, e.g. through repressing it deep within
ourselves.
The sins of the whole [Jewish] world are potentially dealt with in the
Lord. If only individuals would accept Him, then their problem with sin is
resolved. In this lies the imperative to take this amazing message to the
whole world.
2:3
And hereby we truly know that we truly know him: If we keep his
commandments- The idea is not that we are faced with scores of
commandments from the Lord, and if we manage to keep them, then we are in
a state of knowing or having relationship with the Father and Son. For
that was exactly where the Mosaic system failed to be of use to men. Paul
is at pains in Romans 1-8 to point out that law, as in
any
legal code, cannot lead to justification. We note that keeping
commandments [plural] is paralleled in John with keeping His singular
logos
or commandment [singular]. "His commandments" and "the [singular]
commandment" are paralleled in 2 Jn. 6. The plural commandments may be the
Hebrew plural of majesty, referring to one specific commandment. And the
commandment in view is to love each other, as He loved us, and as His
entire
logos of being is our example: “And this is his
commandment, That we should believe on [Gk ‘into’] the name of his Son
Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment” (1 Jn.
3:23). We believe into the Name of Jesus when we are baptized into His
Name. We “love one another” perhaps specifically by keeping the
agape,
the love feast, the breaking of bread, with one another. If we refuse to
break bread with any of our brethren, then we cannot have a good
conscience. I am not saying that simply being baptized and breaking bread
can save anyone. For the commandment is to love as the Lord loved us unto
death, rather than merely pass bread and wine.
Understanding "the commandments" and the singular commandment / word as
loving one another would explain why in the context of the appeals to
'keep' them, we read of receiving the love of the Father and Son. For we
love our brother in receipt of His love. His love and our love are
connected in that if we do not love our brother, we do not know His love.
To know /be in relationship with Him requires us to keep the great
commandment of loving our brother as the Lord loved us, unto death. If our
self-examination reveals that we do love, then we can have a good
conscience, knowing we have kept His commandment[s], and are thus assured
of ‘being there’.
The Lord states clearly that He has left us one commandment- to love
one another as He loved us (Jn. 13:34; 15:12; 1 Jn. 4:21; 5:2). The plural
"commandments" may be a reflection of the Hebraism whereby the plural is
used to emphasize the greatness and cardinal value of one singular thing,
the plural of majesty. This is perhaps confirmed by Jn. 15:17: "These
things [plural] I command you: That you love one another". Love of each
other was the great 'thing'. To love should not be grievous; if we are
walking in the light of His endless love. Therefore "This is his
commandment, that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ,
and love one another" (1 Jn. 3:23). The commandment to love as He loved us
is only capable of understanding and fulfilment if we have believed into
the Name of the Lord Jesus, and experienced that love, having God's love
shed abroad in our hearts by the Spirit we receive after believing into
Him (Rom. 5:5).
2:4
He that says: I know him, and does not keep his commandments, is
a liar, and the truth is not in him- As noted on :3 and :5,
the "commandments" is a plural of majesty referring to the one great
commandment, to love our brother as the Lord loved us. If we do not, then
any profession to "know Him" / have a relationship with Him is hollow.
Indeed, we are 'liars', "the truth" of the light of the Lord Jesus, "the
spirit of truth", is not in our hearts. I suggested on Jn. 8:44 that the
"liar" who committed the first murder was Cain, and not any personal Satan
figure. Cain is set up as representative of all who hate their brother
(3:12). To lie, in this context, is to claim to know God and hold "His
truth", but to not love our brother. The ultimate lie, therefore,
is not to respond to the cross in love: "If a man says, I love God, and
hates his fellow believers, he is a liar. For he that does not love his
fellow believers whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen"
(1 Jn. 4:20). Sadly these terms, truth, lies,
keeping commandments etc., have been applied to knowing theoretical,
propositional truth regarding theology- and the entire point has
[conveniently] been missed. And it is a misplaced focus on those very
things which has led to hatred of brethren.
2:5
But who keeps his word, in him truly has the love of God been
perfected. Hereby we know that we are in him- As noted on :3,
the singular "word" is parallel with plural "commandments", which I
suggest is the plural of majesty referring to the great commandment, to
love one another as the Lord loved us. If we keep the 'word' of loving our
brother, then God's love has been perfected in us, it has achieved its end
result- that we should love as He loved us. And this is our confidence
that we are in Him. If self-examination reveals that we do harbour hatred
in our heart for our brethren- we really need to urgently do something
about it.
2:6- see on Mt. 14:29.
He that says he abides in him, ought also to walk even as he
walked- The reference is to loving as He loved us, which is
the "new commandment" of the next verses. We abide in Him insofar as He
abides in us, through the gift of the Spirit permitted by us to operate in
our hearts. We cannot claim to experience this if we do not love as He
loved us. For the love principle will affect our entire "walk" in daily
living and thinking.
John speaks of Jesus as “that one” in the Greek text of 1 Jn. 2:6;
3:5,7,16; 4:17. I.H. Marshall comments: “Christians were so used to
talking about Jesus that ‘that One’ was a self-evident term”. Too
often I hear fellow believers talking about their faith in terms of “I
believe that… I do not believe that…”. Maybe I’m being hypercritical, but
surely it ought to be a case of believing
in the things of the personal
Jesus, rather than ‘believing that…’. For example. I
believe
in Jesus returning to the earth, rather than ‘I
believe that Jesus will return’. It’s so absolutely vital to see and
believe in the Lord Jesus as a person, rather than merely a set of
doctrine / teaching
about Him.
2:7
Beloved, I write no new commandment to you, but an old
commandment which you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the
word which you heard- The singular "commandment" is the
"commandments" referred to earlier in this section; the plural of majesty
being used to refer to the one great commandment, to love as the Lord
loved us. This was "new" in that it could only have been true after the
advent of the Lord. And it is that commandment which in another sense is
"old" or 'original' in that this was the imperative from "the beginning"
of the Lord's ministry (see on Jn. 1:1 for the reference of "the
beginning"). The "commandment" was imperative in the whole encounter with
the Lord. He was love made flesh, and His whole being demanded and still
demands that from all who encounter Him. Love, in this "new" sense, is
thereby predicated upon knowing Him; Christian love is therefore of an
altogether different order from any secular version of 'love'. The idea of
an old commandment being new may be another way of expressing the idea of
how we can attain a second naivety, a meeting of Jesus 'again for the
first time'. For John now repeats that "new" commandment (:8).
2:8- see on 1 Jn. 3:18.
But now, a new commandment I write to you, which thing is true in
him and in you. Because the darkness is passing away, and the true light
already shines- John is repeating the "new commandment", which
was "new" in that it was to love
as the Lord
loved us unto death. I suggested on :7 that the idea of an old
commandment becoming new suggested that there was a "newness" to this
commandment; it keeps coming new. And so John can write of giving the new
commandment which had in fact already been given in that it was imperative
in the example of the Lord Jesus. Living by that new commandment was "the
truth" which was in the Lord and comes to be "the truth" in us; it is the
final "truth" by which a believer lives. All attempts to read "the truth"
here as referring to some set of doctrinal, intellectually-apprehended
truths has totally missed the point, putting head over heart to a point
where the approach is not at all 'true'. It is true "in" us in that the
spirit of truth, the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, dwells within us.
The allusion to the prologue of John 1 invites us to interpret "the
darkness" as that of the Jewish world. And that was "passing away" as AD70
approached. The true light was that of the personality and personal spirit
of the Lord Jesus. That was shining, and the darkness had not overcome it,
and was in fact now passing away. :17 has the same reference when we read
of "the world" passing away; the Jewish world is in view, as often in
John's Gospel and letters.
2:9
He that says he is in the light and hates his brother, he remains
in the darkness- The darkness, as explained on :8 refers in
the first context to the darkness of the Jewish world. Nobody who claimed
to have left Judaism and entered Christ was legitimate if they hated their
brother, whilst claiming to be in the light of the Lord Jesus. For walking
in His light axiomatically means that we walk in love, and hatred of our
brother is not possible in the light of Him properly perceived. The hatred
of brothers refers to the Jewish hatred of their brother the Lord Jesus,
and of all that were in Him. The initial reference of this hatred of
brethren refers to Jewish Christians who were collaborating with the
synagogue persecution of Christians. And clearly there were plenty of such
agents within the early Jewish Christian communities, false Jewish
brethren who crept in to the early churches. Paul's letters contain many
allusions to this major problem (Gal. 2:4 etc.).
There is fair emphasis that the rejected saints will be cast into
darkness (Mt. 8:12; 22:13; 25:30; Jude 13). Yet darkness is a common
symbol of the world (Eph. 5:11; 6:12; Col. 1:13; 1 Thess. 5:5; 1 Pet.
2:9). And those amongst us who won't love their brother are already in
darkness, self-condemned even before the day arrives (1 Jn. 2:9,11).
2:10
He that loves his brother abides in the light, and there is no
occasion of stumbling in him- Abiding in the light of the Lord
Jesus means we will not hate our brother. The Greek here means that before
us, there will be no stumblingblock. It is interpersonal conflict within
the church, and indeed with those outside of it, which is the most common
cause of spiritual stumbling. But if we have sold our souls for love,
living in the light of the Lord Jesus, then we will not stumble. The
allusion is to how the Lord had spoken of how walking in the daytime means
we will not trip over as we are illuminated by "the light of this world"
(Jn. 11:9). This refers to the Lord Jesus, the light of the world. Walking
in the light of His presence through the Comforter means that we will have
no chance to stumble, because love for others is the dominant spirit of
our lives.
2:11
But he that hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the
darkness, and does not know where he goes, because the darkness has
blinded his eyes- This is true in general terms, but the
initial context refers to those who were ostensibly within the Christian
community, but who were walking in the darkness of Judaism, with its
agenda of hatred toward the Lord Jesus and all His brethren. The great
commandment is to love as the Lord loved us; if we do not live according
to this then we are not in the light of the Lord Jesus. We will have no
certain sense that we are indeed on a journey toward the Kingdom, we will
not know where we go, and shall wander lost in life. A healed blind man
who wilfully returns to his blindness is a tragic picture indeed.
2:12
I write to you little children, because your sins are forgiven
you, for his name's sake- The references here and in :13 to
children, young men and fathers must be understood in the light of the
triple commission to Peter, recorded by John as ultimately applying to us
all, to care for the lambs and sheep (Jn. 21:15-17). The little ones would
refer to recent converts, who were rejoicing in the implication of baptism
into the Lord's Name, by which there sins were forgiven. For there is a
clear link between baptism and forgiveness. John is writing to these three
groups because he sees the triple commission to Peter about caring for the
lambs and sheep as applying to him too. He felt he too had betrayed the
Lord, and that His commission here was relevant to him and all in Him.
This of course is very far from the Catholic interpretation of Peter's
unique role.
2:13
I write to you fathers, because you know him who is from the
beginning. I write to you young men, because you have overcome the evil
one. I have written to you little children, because you know the Father-
See on :12. The "fathers", the older ones, were those who were the "sheep"
and not "lambs", those who had had longer experience in Christ, and who
had known Him "from the beginning", a term often used in John for the
beginning of the Lord's ministry (see on Jn. 1:1). The younger ones are
commended for overcoming "the evil one", initially a reference to the
'satan' of Jewish opposition to the Lord. They therefore loved their
brethren and were not guilty of hating them by being part of the Jewish
world's persecution program of the Christians. Knowing the Son, whose
manifestation had been "from the beginning" of His ministry, is parallel
with knowing the Father. To see / know / have relationship with the Son is
to know / see the Father, as often declared in John's Gospel and letters.
2:14
I have written to you fathers, because you know him who is from
the beginning- This repeats what is said in :13, perhaps to
emphasize that spiritual maturity is in having known the Lord Jesus many
years and continuing in that relationship with Him
I have written to you young men, because you are strong and the
word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one-
These new converts had overcome the Jewish Satan or “wicked one” trying to
especially subvert young converts, both in years and spiritual maturity,
just as it had tried to subvert the disciples during the Lord’s ministry
(Mt. 13:19 the wicked one catches away the word sown in the hearts of new
converts). The Lord clearly described the Jewish world as the evil one in
Jn. 3:19; 7:7; 17:15. Their strength was because the
logos
of God, the Lord Jesus, abode in them. Whilst we should love and meditate
upon the Scriptures, this is not the reference of God's
logos
in John. The prologues to both the Gospel and the letters make it clear
that the reference is to the Lord Jesus. It was the Lord personally who
overcame the Jewish world (Jn. 16:33). His victory is counted to all
believers in Him; the parallel is between "the evil one" and "the world",
rather than to any superhuman personal being called 'satan'. The allusion
in this verse is also to the prologue to the Gospel, where we read that
the darkness of the Jewish world had not overcome the light (Jn. 1:5).
Those in the light, in whom the
logos, the spirit of the Lord Jesus, abides, had
overcome the darkness of their world. The parallel with :13 is perhaps to
show that they had not overcome the world in their own strength, but
through the Lord's indwelling.
2:15
Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If
anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him-
"In the world" is the very phrase used of how the Lord was in the Jewish
world, but rejected by it (Jn. 1:10; 9:5; 13:1; 16:33; 17:11-13). There
could be no compromise between the Jewish world and the Christian; for the
Jews hated the Christians, and to be part with them was to be involved in
hating ones' Christian brother. And in this case, the love of the Father
would not be in them.
2:16
For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust
of the eyes and the vain glory of life, is not of the Father but is of the
world- The initial reference was to how the Jewish world was
full of these things. The Pharisees were covetous (Lk. 16:14), and the
Jewish religion was big business; the religious leaders were the
wealthiest people in Palestine. The Sadducees had no belief in an
afterlife, and were totally hedonistic. This is why later in Revelation,
John will later describe the Jewish system as "Babylon", obsessed with
wealth and pride, drunk with the blood of the Christian prophets and
martyrs. In Jn. 8:44 the Lord had characterized the Jewish world as doing
the lusts of their father; these various lusts are summarized as the lust
of the [Jewish] world which was in process of passing away as AD70
approached (:17).
John speaks of how we are tempted by “the lust of the flesh and the
lust of the eyes and the vain glory of life”, alluding to the very things
which were Adam and Eve’s temptation in Eden. Adam is set up in Scripture
as ‘everyman’; on almost every page of the Bible there are allusions back
to him. Thus Jezebel’s provocation of Ahab to sin is presented in the same
terms as that of Adam and Eve; Israel “like Adam have transgressed the
covenant” (Hos. 6:7). Paul sensed that as the serpent deceived Eve
by his subtilty, so the minds of the Corinthian Christians were being
deceived by false reasoning (2 Cor. 11:3 = Gen. 3:13). The sinner chooses
or accepts the words of the “tongue of the subtle” (Job 15:5 – the same
word is used about the serpent in Gen. 3:1). The frequent command: “You
shall not covet” (Ex. 20:17 etc.) uses the same Hebrew word translated
“desire” when we read of how Eve “desired” the fruit (Gen. 3:6); yet
Israel “desired” the wrong fruit (Is. 1:29). In all these allusions [and
they exist in almost every chapter of the Bible] we are being shown how
human sin is a repetition in essence of that of our first parents. The
insistent emphasis is that we should rise above and
not be like them.
2:17
And the world passes away and the lust of it, but he that does
the will of God abides for ever- The Jewish world was fast
passing away as AD70 approached. The various lusts of :16 refer to those
of the Jewish world; its lust for pride and wealth would all come to an
end in the destruction to come. Jn. 9:31 has used the same words in
describing the Lord Jesus personally as the one who "does the will of
God". But all who are in Him are likewise born of God's will (Jn. 1:13).
The Lord is presented in opposition to the Jewish world; just as He is in
the prologue of John 1. If ever a man stood with His back to the world, it
was the Lord and the Jewish world. But He is the one who "abides for
ever", whereas the Jewish world passed away. He "abides for ever" in the
sense that the gift of His Spirit, the Comforter, would "abide for ever"
with His followers (Jn. 14:16). The Jewish idea that God would "abide for
ever" in the Jerusalem temple came to an end when that world passed away
(1 Kings 8:13); the eternal abiding was by the spirit of the Lord Jesus in
a spiritual temple of believing persons.
2:18
Little children, it is the last hour- This
may not necessarily mean that John is expecting the Lord's return
imminently, although Paul certainly writes as if he did. And I have
elsewhere suggested this is because we are to live in the spirit of
expectancy for the Lord's return imminently. But the "hour" which John's
Gospel repeatedly mentions is the hour of the Lord's death, which the Lord
lived His life expecting and anticipating. So John's idea may be that as
the Lord faced His cross, so the faithful community were to realize that
they were to meet the crisis of declension, false teaching and persecution
in the same spirit in which He faced and anticipated the cross. The next
verse (:19) will go on to allude to Judas going out into the night and
betraying the Lord at "the last hour". And John sees the parallel in some
of his converts going back out into the darkness of Judaism, just as Judas
had done; indeed he considers that this is the sign that truly they were
in "the last hour" (:19). They were not expecting it, it had come, for
them. We too are to face our crises knowing we are fellowshipping the
Lord's cross and passion experiences.
This is why John's writings like to use the word "overcome". Although it is the last hour for us, the time to fellowship the Lord's final sufferings, He "overcame" on the cross and even during the "last hour" in the upper room before He actually died ("I have overcome the [Jewish] world", Jn. 16:33; "the Lion of he tribe of Judah has prevailed [s.w. overcome] to open the book", Rev. 5:5, "conquering [s.w. overcome] and to conquer" Rev. 6:2). And we likewise have already overcome the wicked one, the system pressing in upon us which may even slay us (1 Jn. 2:13,14 "you have overcome the wicked one", the Jewish world, "you have overcome them", the agents of the Jewish system, 1 Jn. 4:4). We overcome by our faith in Jesus, faith that His overcoming means our overcoming ("whatever is begotten of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that has overcome the world, our faith... who is he that overcomes the world, but he that believes that Jesus is the Son of God" 1 Jn. 5:4,5). And yet in the short term, the Lord was apparently overcome by the Jewish world, in that they slew Him. But it was truly a case of the magnificent defeat; through their temporary 'overcoming' of Him in death, He overcame them. And likewise with us. The beast 'overcomes and kills' the saints temporarily (Rev. 11:7; 13:7); but "they overcame him by the blood of the lamb" (Rev. 12:11) and 'got victory over [s.w. 'overcome'] the beast' (Rev. 15:2), because "the Lamb shall overcome them" (Rev. 17:14). The repeated promises in the opening letters of Revelation to "him that overcomes" are fulfilled in that the Lord overcame. Their faith in His overcoming means that they overcome finally. They are counted as the Lord Jesus, and His overcoming is theirs; so that "He that overcomes shall inherit all things; and... he shall be my son" (Rev. 21:7), i.e. shall be counted as the Son of God. We overcome because "you are of God", i.e. born of God, His sons just as the Lord was His Son (1 Jn. 4:4). Therefore "whoever is born of God overcomes the world" (1 Jn. 5:4) in that we are counted as God's only begotten, victorious son.
The events of the Lord's passion are constantly alluded to in
John's letters, just as his gospel record is really an account of the
Lord's final week with an extended introduction. A significant amount of
the gospel is about the Lord's last week. In his letters, John appeals
constantly for love of our brethren as the way to overcome. This must be
seen in the context of his recording "the new commandment... [to] love one
another as I have loved you" in the death of the cross. All John's appeals
to love have this in mind. Likewise his many references to the Comforter
and the gift of the Spirit are obviously allusive to the Lord's promise of
the Comforter in the upper room discourse. John's references to the need
to keep the commandment, at times expressed with the Hebraic plural of
majesty "commandments", all clearly allude to the new commandment. 1 Jn.
2:7-10 is the most explicit: "I write no new commandment to you, but an
old commandment which you had from the beginning. The old commandment is
the word which you heard. But now, a new commandment I write to you, which
thing is true in him and in you. Because the darkness is passing away, and
the true light [of living in the same kind of love-to-the-end as the Lord
showed on the cross] already shines. He that says he is in the light and
hates his brother, he remains in the darkness.
He that loves his brother abides in the light". 1 Jn. 3:23,24 likewise:
"this is His commandment: that we should... love one another, even as He
gave us commandment. And he that keeps His commandments abides in Him".
Note how plural "commandments" and singular "commandment" are parallel, as
in Jn. 15:17 "These things I command you, so that you may love one
another", the singular commandment. Likewise 2 Jn. 5,6: "not as though I
write a new commandment, but that which we had from the beginning, that we
love one another. And this is love, that we should walk after His
commandments. This is the commandment, even as you heard from the
beginning". The beginning of the Gospel is the love of Christ in dying on
the cross, and our need to respond to that in loving as He loved us.
And as you heard that antichrist comes- This would presumably be a reference to the "man of sin" prophecy in 2 Thess. 2. The coming of that individual was to be pressaged by the arising of individuals in his spirit, apparently in the "temple of God", the church.
Even now have there arisen many antichrists. Whereby we
know that it is the last hour- These antichrists are those of
:19, the "they" who entered the Christian community but were never really
"of" it. This surely refers to the Judaist infiltrators of the early
church (Gal. 2:4). In John's immediate context, these people were "anti"
Christ both in the sense of being against Him, and of false appearing like
Him. They were part of the singular "antichrist" system which John felt
was to arise in "the last hour". We wonder if he has in view the uprising
of a system of evil just before the Lord's coming, of the kind he
prophesied about in Revelation. It could even be that John's epistles were
written after Revelation, and it is to that document he refers in writing
that they have "heard" about the coming of antichrist. The beasts, whore,
false prophet etc. are all capable of application to the Jewish system
destroyed in AD70, and this was the "synagogue of satan" which the opening
letters of Revelation begin by talking about. This is not to say that
Revelation does not have other and specifically 'last days' fulfilments.
John may have in mind 2 Thess. 2, as the source from which they had
heard about the coming of antichrist. This envisages a specific
individual, similar to Judas, arising from within the community of
believers and being enthroned in "the temple". I have noted on that
chapter the possible fulfilments of this "man of sin" in a Jewish context.
The 'revealing' of the "man of sin" would then connect with the
'revealing' of the specific antichrists (:19).
2:19- see on Mk. 14:68; Lk. 22:31; Jude 19.
They went out from us but they were not of us. For if they had
been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out, that
they might be revealed, that all these are not of us- This is
the language of the Lord in Jn. 17, that we are in but not of the
world. Here, the contrary is also true; some can be in the church at some
point, but not 'of it'. Clearly John has in mind the Lord's teaching he
recorded in Jn. 8:35, that the son remains always in the household, but
the servant / slave doesn't: "And the servant does not stay in the house
for ever. The son stays forever". The allusion is also to Judas going out into the night to betray the Lord. As
noted on :18, the antichrists have some similarities with "the man of
sin", who as "the son of perdition" is also based upon Judas. There was a
conscious campaign of infiltration of the church by Judaist false brethren
(Gal. 2:4). According to many of Paul's letters, they enjoyed fair success
in destabilizing the churches Paul founded. But in the community John had
founded and is writing to, they "went out from us". Their exit revealed
them for who they were. The implication is that those who wilfully leave
the community of the body of Christ are effectively leaving Him. It is
likewise no less a sin to exclude members of that body from association
with it. 3:9,10 use the same word in saying that the revealing of the sons
of God and those of "the devil" [the Jewish system] is in whether they
love or hate. Going out from the community of believers is not abiding in
love. Their exit revealed them; and the revelation is in whether we love
or hate (3:9,10).
"All these are not of us" can be rendered "they were not all of us"
(AV), and this makes the reference to the Lord's words about Judas even
clearer. He said that "not all" of them were cleansed because of Judas
being the one amongst the "all" who would betray Him (Jn. 13:10,18).
2:20
And you have an anointing from the Holy One and you know all
these things- The grammar here means that the "anointing" is
the thing anointed with, as it were the oil used in the anointing. But
literally, it means 'a Christ-ing', for "Christ" means 'anointed'. The
reference is to the Spirit. John in his gospel has recorded how the Lord
promised the gift of the Comforter, to the point that the disciples would
feel His personal presence as if He were physically present as He had been
in the brief years of His ministry. Note that John applies this allusion
to the Comforter to "you", his converts, who had not met the Lord. The
promise of the Comforter was therefore not just to the original disciples
but "for ever", to all subsequent believers. This presence of the Spirit
was effectively the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ personally in their
hearts. And by this "you know all these things", referring to their
knowledge of the Judas-like individuals who had entered their community
and then gone out from them- presumably, because they "knew" them. Perhaps
the allusion is to how the Lord through His spirit "knew from the
beginning" those such as Judas who didn't sincerely believe and should
betray Him (Jn. 6:64). His spirit had been given to the believers; the
"anointing" was the means by which He abode within them and taught them
"all things" (:27), and He abides in His people by His Spirit (3:24; 4:13;
Jn. 14:17). The "things" immediately in view here are about the Judaist
plot to infiltrate the fledgling churches. Paul had the same revealed
knowledge, but seems to have been less successful in stamping it out than
John was in his community.
We read in :20,27 that we have each been anointed. The idea of
anointing was to signal the initiation of someone. I'd therefore be
inclined to see this as alluding to baptism; when we become in Christ, in
the anointed, then as 2 Cor. 1:21 says, we too are anointed in a sense by
the gift of the Spirit. We're given a specific mission and purpose. "The
anointing that you received" would therefore refer to our commissioning at
baptism and the empowerment of the Spirit to achieve it. The Comforter
passages are in the specific context of promising empowerment in obeying
the great commission of preaching the Lord to all nations. And it is that
same commission which is in view here. It seems to imply a one time act of
being anointed / commissioned / inaugurated for service. Baptism isn't
therefore merely an initiation into a community; it's a specific
commissioning for active service, in ways which are unique to us. We do
well to bring this point out to those we prepare for baptism. The words
for 'anointing' are unique to 1 John but they occur in the LXX to describe
the anointing / initiation of the priests, and of the tabernacle /
dwelling place of God (e.g. Ex. 29:7; 35:14,28). John sees us as the
dwelling place / tabernacle of the Father. There is some historical
evidence that candidates for baptism in the early church were anointed
with oil. References- uninspired of course, just for historical interest-
are Tertullian,
De Baptismo, 7.1,2; and various references in the
'Didascalia', the Acts of Judas Thomas, and the Pseudo-Clementine
epistles. It could be that in the house ecclesias to whom John was
writing, there was already this practice in place, and the initial readers
would've understood this clearly. Paul, writing to a different audience,
uses a different figure when he speaks of being "sealed with that holy
spirit of promise". We are after all baptized into the Father, Son and
Holy Spirit. So the anointing which we've received would in my view refer
back to our baptism. It was the initiation of us into service, just as the
priests and tabernacle parts were anointed. The question we much each sort
out is, what are our specific talents, our gifts, the potential uses for
which the Father and Son intend us, the paths of service they potentially
mapped out for us and initiated us for at our immersions?
2:21
I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but
because you know it! And because no lie is of the truth- I
have suggested that "truth" in John's Gospel refers not simply to abstract
"truth" in a general sense, or in terms of correct interpretation; but
specifically to the Lord Jesus as "the truth". This statement that they
know the Lord Jesus ["the truth"] then leads in naturally to the warning
in :22 that there are those who deny the Lord Jesus. Such a "lie" cannot
be part of those who are "of the truth", of the Lord Jesus. Those who were
stating untruths about the Lord were therefore not to be considered
Christian. They knew the truth in that they knew the Lord Jesus, and could
therefore discern that the false teachers were not teaching correctly
about Him. This is the context both before and after this verse.
2:22
Who is the liar but he that denies that Jesus is the Christ? This
is the antichrist: he that denies the Father and the Son- The
antichrist has been defined in our notes on :18 as Judaist infiltrators to
the fledgling church. They were denying that the Lord was the Messiah, the
Christ, the anointed one. But the faithful had received the anointing
(:1), the presence of the Christ within, as real as He was once amongst
His people "in the flesh". By denying Him as the anointed one, they were
declaring themselves not to be of Him, to not have received His Spirit,
and those who had received it could see clearly that they were not His.
They were denying the Son, as Peter had, but without repentance. And for
all Judaism's much vaunted focus upon God, they were denying the Father by
denying His Son.
We deny Jesus is the Christ if we don't preach Him (Mt. 10:33). As
explained on :20, the context here is of having been anointed with the
commission to preach Christ to the world. It follows that if we really
believe that Jesus was not just Jesus of Nazareth but the Christ of God,
therefore we won't deny Him but will preach Him. This is why there is
connection between confessing Jesus as Christ and preaching Him (Jn. 9:22;
Acts 18:5; Phil. 2:11).
2:23- see on Mt. 10:32.
Whoever denies the Son, the same has not the Father. He that
confesses the Son has the Father also- The Judaists were
arguing that they were loyal to the Father, but His Son was not the Christ
/ Messiah. And yet they thereby were denying the Father, and did not
'have' the Father. "The Son" had to be 'confessed'. This is a theme of
John's Gospel; that some claimed to believe in the Son, but would not
"confess" Him for fear of the Jewish world around them (Jn. 12:42), seeing
that any who "confessed" Jesus as Christ were excluded from the synagogue
system (Jn. 9:22 s.w.). John the Baptist is held up as an example to be
followed of confessing and not denying the Lord (Jn. 1:20); and Joseph and
Nicodemus are presented as parade examples of Jews who progressed from
secret faith to open confession. Confession of the Lord is essential for
final salvation; denial of Him before men results in His denial of us (Mt.
10:32,33). The infiltrators would not openly confess the Son, and
therefore remained in the synagogue system; but they were thereby
effectively denying the Son, and yet they claimed some association with
the church, appearing to be "of us" (:19).
It was of course known to the entire church that their early leader Peter had denied his Lord. Denial of the Son therefore cannot refer to temporary failure, such as caving in to Saul / Paul's torturing of Christians to deny the Messiahship and Divine Sonship of Jesus. It surely refers to those who lived lives denying Him, despite having once known Him. For the whole idea of 'denying' the Son does allude to Peter's denials, and the sense clearly is that they are consciously lying by denying the Son when they do in fact know Him. Again we have yet more comfort that despite temporary failure, and the ongoing experience of sin, we can be confident that we are walking in love.
2:24
As for you, let that abide in you which you heard from the
beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also
shall abide in the Son and in the Father- John strongly links
belief in Christ as the Son of God with a life of true love. They had
heard from “the beginning" of their contact with the Gospel that Christ
was the Son of God; and yet also the need to love one another. The
“message" which they had heard from the beginning was that Christ was the
Son of God (1 Jn. 2:24); and yet it was also that we should love one
another (1 Jn. 3:11). Encounter with Him, living in the light of His
personal example and the receipt of His spirit / mind, results in love.
This is why in the context of teaching the need for love, John warns
against false teaching regarding the nature of the Lord as Son of God (1
Jn. 2:22,23; 4:1-4; 2 Jn. 7-11). “The word... from the beginning" was the
logos of Christ, the essence
of Him and His spirit, which was love unto death (Jn. 1:1-3); and yet in
John’s letters, the word from the beginning was that we should love each
other (1 Jn. 2:7; 3:11). This is the essence of belief in the Lord: love
for each other. “This is his commandment, That we should believe on the
name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another" (3:23). “Whoever
believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loves
him that begat loves him also that is begotten of him" [i.e. your
brother]. “If we love one another, God dwells in us... whoever shall
confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwells in him" (4:12,15). But
why is there this link between love, and belief in Jesus of Nazareth being
the begotten Son of God? Theologically, it could be said that if we accept
Him as God’s Son, then we must likewise accept all God’s other sons,
begotten as they are by His Spirit. But practically, are we not being
taught to see the
pure wonder of the way in
which
Almighty God had a Son and gave that Son, so freely
and so painfully, for us...? The
pure wonder of God having a
Son of our nature, a child and then a man who showed us the essence of God
displayed in human flesh and temptation; and then giving Him to us... If
we see this, we will naturally show love to our brethren. So it isn’t just
a case of thinking yes, we believe the Lord was Son of God, not God the
Son- and period. No. There’s infinitely more to it than this. This faith
and understanding can tear down every barrier between men, and provide the
inspiration for a life of true, self-sacrificial love. The true
wonder
of it all simply must be meditated upon. That God’s very own son should
begin so small, as an ovum, “a single fertilized egg barely visible to the
naked eye, an egg that would divide and redivide until a foetus took
shape, enlarging cell by cell inside a nervous teenager".
The Lord speaks of us abiding in His word (Jn. 8:31) and yet also of
His word abiding in us, and us abiding in Him (Jn. 15:7). That
logos is not the whole Bible, but the
logos
of Him, the essence of His personality, recorded words, character
and, in a word, His spirit. That word abiding in us may indeed refer in
the first instance to the illiterate new Christian converts reciting over
and over in their minds the Gospel accounts. In all situations they were
to have the ‘word of Jesus’ hovering in their minds. To abide in Christ
was and is to have His word abiding in us; but not just His recorded
words. The very essence of Him should be the spirit which takes over our
entire life and thinking. Paul’s evident familiarity with the Lord’s words
is an example of how one of our brethren lived this out in practice. We
have to ask how frequently in the daily grind the words and person of the
Master come to mind, how close they are to the surface in our
subconscious… for this is the essence of Christianity. It’s not so much a
question of consciously memorizing His words, but so loving Him that quite
naturally His words and being are never far from our consciousness, and
frequently come out in our thinking and words. No wonder it seems the
early church made new converts memorize the Gospels. And perhaps too 1 Jn.
3:9 has similar reference- the seed of God [the Gospel- of John- which the
converts had first heard] must abide in the convert, so that he or she
doesn’t [continue in] sin. The continual meditation upon the Lord’s words
and person as we have them in the Gospels will have the same effect upon
us.
This
is the real way to overcome sin and to achieve genuine spiritual
mindedness, to know the mind of Christ; in this way the Lord Jesus abides
in us by His Spirit (1 Jn. 3:24). Abiding in the word of Christ, His words
abiding in us, abiding in love, abiding in the Father and Son, the Spirit
and anointing abiding in us (1 Jn. 4:16) are all parallel ideas.
But we are to "let" or allow His
logos
/ Spirit abide in us. It is not just a matter of psychological steel will
to recite His words to ourselves. We are to allow Him to fill us with His
Spirit, to make His abode or dwelling with us.
2:25
And this is the promise which he promised us- everlasting life-
The promise of eternal life in John's gospel refers to the present give of
the eternal life right now; it is a reference to the spirit of the life of
Jesus which is given into us now. It is "eternal" in that this is the kind
of life and spirit which we shall eternally live, resuming living it
seamlessly at the resurrection of the body.
2:26
These things have I written to you concerning those that would
lead you astray- The reference has been to the Jewish
infiltrators of the churches (Gal. 2:4), teaching that the Lord was not in
fact "Christ". "Lead you astray" is the term used in the Olivet prophecy
of how false Christs [cp. "antichrist"] would lead many astray, and this
would be a sign of the last day approaching (Mt. 24:24). AD70 was clearly
approaching as John wrote this; and we wonder whether there will be a
similar collapse of faith due to infiltrators in the last days before His
return. Mt. 24:24 predicted the success of these people; they would "lead
many astray", and John is clearly up against this problem.
2:27
And as for you, the anointing which you received of him abides in
you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches
you all things and is true and is no lie and even as it taught you, so you
are to abide in him- As noted on :1, the anointing refers to
the gift of the Spirit, of the Christ in them and with them. The Comforter
passages had explained that one role of the Comforter would be to replace
the personal presence of the Lord on earth as their teaching Rabbi (see on
Jn. 14:18). In this sense they needed no human teacher. And all those who
have received the Comforter will likewise not be at the mercy of teachers
within the church system they are involved with. The abiding of the Lord
in us is through His spirit (3:24; 4:13; Jn. 14:17). The function of this
is to actively teach us. This is the way to avoid being led astray by
false teaching. What is taught, that which we hear and read, must be
compared against the spirit of Christ within us. And we will soon sense
what is right and wrong; not of our own natural intuition, but in
comparison with His spirit within us. This is the sense behind Jn. 7:17:
"If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know of this teaching, whether
it is of God, or I speak from myself". The will of God is to believe on
who He sent; and this belief will result in the gift of the Lord's Spirit.
This is why the most simple, illiterate folk who are filled with the
Spirit can so easily detect false teaching about their Lord.
"You do not need any man to teach you" alludes to the promise of the Spirit within the new covenant, which applies now to all who have entered that covenant by baptism into Jesus: "They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them" (Jer. 31:31-34). Those who have the Spirit will not be endlessly listening to this or that teacher for teaching. They are led by their own Spirit-filled relationship with God through His word.
2:28- see on Lk. 6:46.
And now, little children, abide in him- The appeal
was to abide in Him by letting Him abiding in them by the Spirit (3:24;
4:13; Jn. 14:17). There is an element of our permitting Him to dwell in
us; being possessed by the Spirit does not remove our freewill in allowing
Him to be a guest within us.
That, when he shall be manifested, we may have boldness and not
be ashamed before him at his coming- The "boldness" at the day
of judgment is only possible if we have the "eternal life" within us now,
having received and having lived the spirit of the life of Jesus in our
mortal life. To forsake that Spirit would leave them naked and thereby
ashamed before Him.
"Before him" is literally 'from before Him'. After the rejected start to
perceive the reality of rejection, there will be an ashamed slinking away
from the judgment. It would appear that the wicked will argue back in
protest against their rejection at the judgment ("When saw we thee?...
Thou art an hard man"), and will desperately try to find acceptance. All
this has to be reconciled with the silent dejection and grim acceptance of
the 'goats'. 1 Jn. 2:28 speaks of them as being "ashamed from before him
at his coming", the Greek suggesting the idea of slinking away in shame,
after the pattern of Israel being
carried away into captivity (2
Kings 17:6,11,23,33- Heb. 'to denude, make naked'). Another foretaste of
this was in the way the condemned world of Noah’s time [the flood was a
clear type of the final judgment] were to ‘pine away / languish’ (Gen.
6:17; 7:21- AV “die”). The wicked will melt away from the Lord's presence
(Ps. 68:2). Rejected Israel are described as being "ashamed away" (Joel
1:12)- the same idea. This is the idea behind Heb. 12:15 RVmg: "…man that
falleth back from the grace of God". What they did in this life in
slinking away from the reality of pure grace back to Judaism will be what
is worked out in their condemnation experience. Note that Jesus Himself
will be likewise ashamed of His unworthy followers (Lk. 9:26); there will
be a mutuality in the natural distancing between the two parties. This is
the scene of Rev. 16:15- the rejected being made naked in shame. This
slinking back in shame will fulfil the prophecies of Is. 1:24,29 and Jer.
2:35,36, which speak of the rejected being made ashamed, becoming ashamed,
of their idols; which is all that legalistic obedience amounts to. They
will be made ashamed by the judgment process. Thus we have the picture of
them initially arguing with Jesus, growing less and less forcible, giving
way to a pleading with tears for a change of mind, finally followed by a
silent slinking away in shame. There seems a certain similarity between
this and how the combined Gospel records imply that men initially mocked
Jesus on the cross, and then eventually slipped away in silence (Heb.
6:6). Adam attempted to hide from God's presence, the Hebrew implying 'to
drawn oneself back'. Judas went away (Gk. he retired away) to try to hang
himself, once he knew his condemnation (Mt. 27:3-5). See on Mt. 27:5.
Speechlessness is a characteristic of the rejected (Mt. 22:12); the
brothers slunk away from Joseph's physical presence (Gen. 45:4), as the
rejected will.
1 Jn. 2:28 speaks of our being able to have "boldness" at the day of
judgment; but the Greek
parresia means literally 'a
saying of all'. This free telling of all will be when we list our sins to
the Lord; and yet, in the greatest paradox, this will be our confidence
before Him. That 'freedom of speech' in His presence will be the sign that
we are accepted; and yet the freedom of speech begins with our free
confession to Him of our unworthiness.
The 'manifestation' of the Lord is paralleled here with His
parousia or second coming. But John has used this word of how
the life and person of the Lord is manifested to believers in Him through
the Spirit (1:2; 3:8) as He was manifested in His life (Jn. 1:31; 2:11
etc.), just as His physical life and presence was manifested at His
literal resurrection (Jn. 21:1,14). The Comforter enables us to experience
the Lord's presence just as real as He was physically present with men
during His ministry. This is not at all to devalue His second, literal
coming; but the essence of His manifestation is already experienced by
those who have His Spirit.
2:29 If you know that he is righteous, you know that everyone also
that does righteousness is begotten of him- This is in the
context of discerning false teachers. The New Testament always associates
false teaching with false behaviour; for by fruits a tree is known. Hardly
ever is abstract false teaching mentioned, genuine misunderstanding of
Bible verses and so forth. Always the false teachers are known by their
immoral fruits. The litmus test as to whether a person is "of Him" is
whether they do righteousness, as He is righteous. "You know..." is the
way to discern. The spirit of Christ within us will feel an intuitive
disjunction with those who lack that same Spirit. We are begotten of Him
through receipt of the Spirit (Jn. 3:3-5). The key issue in false teachers
is that they are not born again by the Spirit, and their lack of personal
righteousness reflects that. The parallel in 1 Jn. 4:7 says that loving
our brother is proof we are born of God. The lack of righteousness in view
here is therefore in practice, a lack of brotherly love. Likewise 3:10
parallels not loving our brother with not doing righteousness.
Previous Chapter
Next Chapter 
