Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 John 2:18
Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
18 26. The Persons to be Avoided; Antichrists
18. Little children ] Or, Little ones. It is difficult to see anything in this section specially suitable to children: indeed the very reverse is rather the case. The same word ( ) is used here as in 1Jn 2:14 and Joh 21:5. S. John’s readers in general are addressed, irrespective of age. Both his Epistle and Gospel are written for adults and for well-instructed Christians.
it is the last time ] More literally, it is the last hour; possibly, but not probably, it is a last hour. The omission of the definite article is quite intelligible and not unusual: the idea is sufficiently definite without it, for there can be only one last hour. Similarly (Judges 18) we have ‘ in (the) last time there shall be mockers walking after their own ungodly lusts’: and (Act 1:8; Act 13:47) ‘ unto (the) uttermost part of the earth’. A great deal has been written upon this text in order to avoid a very plain but unwelcome conclusion, that by the ‘last hour’ S. John means the time immediately preceding the return of Christ to judge the world. Hundreds of years have passed away since S. John wrote these words, and the Lord is not yet come. Rather, therefore, than admit an interpretation which seemed to charge the Apostle with a serious error, commentators have suggested all kinds of explanations as substitutes for the obvious one. The following considerations place S. John’s meaning beyond all reasonable doubt.
1. He has just been stating that the world is on the wane and that its dissolution has already begun. 2. He has just declared that the obedient Christian shall abide ‘unto the age’ of Christ’s kingdom of glory. 3. He goes on to give as a proof that it is the ‘last hour’, that many Antichrists have already arisen; it being the common belief of Christians that Antichrist would immediately precede the return of Christ. 4. ‘The last day’ is a phrase peculiar to S. John (Joh 6:39-40; Joh 6:44; Joh 6:54; Joh 11:24; Joh 12:48), and invariably means the end of the world, not the Christian dispensation. 5. Analogous phrases in other parts of N.T. point in the same direction: ‘In the last days grievous times shall come’ (2Ti 3:1); ‘Ye are guarded through faith unto a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time’ (1Pe 1:5); ‘In the last days mockers shall come with mockery’ (2Pe 3:3). These and other passages shew that by ‘the last days’, ‘last time’, ‘last hour’, and the like, Christian writers did not mean the whole time between the first and second coming of Christ, but only the concluding portion of it. 6. We find similar language with similar meaning in the sub-apostolic age. Thus Ignatius ( Eph. XI.) writes; “These are the last times. Henceforth let us be reverent; let us fear the longsuffering of God, lest it turn into a judgment against us. For either let us fear the wrath which is to come, or let us love the grace which now is.”
Of other interpretations of ‘the last hour’ the most noteworthy are these. (1) The Christian dispensation, which we have every reason to believe is the last. This is the sense in which S. John’s words are true; but this is plainly not his meaning. The appearance of Christ, not of Antichrist, proves that the Christian dispensation is come. (2) A very grievous time, tempora periculosa pessima et abjectissima. This is quite against usage whether in classical or N.T. Greek: comp. 2Ti 3:1. The classical phrase, ‘to suffer the last things’, i.e. ‘to suffer extremities’ ( ), supplies no analogy: here the notion of ‘grievous’ comes from the verb. (3) The eve of the destruction of Jerusalem. How could the appearance of Antichrist prove that this had arrived? And Jerusalem had perished at least a dozen years before the probable date of this Epistle. (4) The eve of S. John’s own death. Antichrists could be no sign of that.
It is admitted even by some of those who reject the obvious interpretation that “the Apostles expected a speedy appearing or manifestation of Jesus as the Judge of their nation and of all nations” (Maurice): which is to admit the whole difficulty of the rejected explanation. Only gradually was the vision of the Apostles cleared to see the true nature of the spiritual kingdom which Christ had founded on earth and left in their charge. Even Pentecost did not at once give them perfect insight. Being under the guidance of the Holy Spirit they could not teach what was untrue: but, like the Prophets before them, they sometimes uttered words which were true in a sense far higher than that which was present to their own minds. In this higher sense S. John’s words here are true. Like others, he was wrong in supposing ‘that the kingdom of God was immediately to appear’ (Luk 19:11), for ‘it was not for them to know times or seasons which the Father hath set within His own authority’ (Act 1:7). He was right in declaring that, the Messiah having come, it was the ‘last hour’. No event in the world’s history can ever equal the coming of Christ until He comes again. The epoch of Christianity, therefore, is rightly called the ‘last hour’, although it has lasted nearly two thousand years. What is that compared with the many thousands of years since the creation of man, and the limitless geological periods which preceded the creation of man? What again in the eyes of Him in whose sight ‘a thousand years are but yesterday?’
“It may be remarked that the only point on which we can certainly say that the Apostles were in error, and led others into error, is in their expectation of the immediate coming of Christ; and this is the very point which our Saviour says (Mar 13:32) is known only to the Father” (Jelf).
as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come ] Better, even as ye heard that Antichrist cometh: the first verb is aorist, not perfect; the second present, not future; and the conjunction is of the same strong form as in 1Jn 2:6. This seems to be a case in which the aorist should be retained in English (see on 1Jn 2:11). As in 1Jn 2:7, the reference is probably to a definite point in their instruction in the faith: and ‘cometh’ should be retained in order to bring out the analogy between the Christ and the Antichrist. The one was hoped for, and the other dreaded, with equal certainty; and hence each might be spoken of as ‘He that cometh’. ‘Art Thou He that cometh?’ (Mat 11:3; Luk 19:20). Comp. Mar 8:38; Mar 11:9; Joh 4:25; Joh 6:14; Joh 11:27, &c. &c. And as to the coming of Antichrists the N. T. seems to be as explicit as the O. T. with regard to the coming of Christ. ‘Many shall come in My name, saying I am the Christ; and shall lead many astray There shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; so as to lead astray, if possible even the elect’ (Mat 24:5; Mat 24:24). Comp. Mar 13:22-23; Act 20:29; 2Ti 3:1; 2Pe 2:1; and especially 2Th 2:3, which like the passage before us seems to point to one distinct person or power as the one Antichrist, whose spirit animates all antichristian teachers.
The term ‘Antichrist’ in Scripture occurs only in the First and Second Epistles of S. John (1Jn 2:18; 1Jn 2:22, 1Jn 4:3; 2Jn 1:7). The earliest instance of its use outside Scripture is in S. Polycarp ( Ep. ad Phil, VII.), in a passage which shews that this disciple of S. John (a.d. 140 155) knew our Epistle: see on 1Jn 4:3. The term does not mean merely a mock Christ or false Christ, for which the N.T. term is ‘pseudo-Christ’ (Mat 24:24; Mar 13:22). Nor does it mean simply an opponent of Christ, for which we should probably have ‘enemy of Christ’, like ‘enemy of the Cross of Christ’ (Php 3:18) and ‘enemy of God’ (Jas 4:4). But it includes both these ideas of counterfeiting and opposing; it means an opposition Christ or rival Christ; just as we call a rival Pope an ‘antipope’. The Antichrist is, therefore, a usurper, who under false pretences assumes a position which does not belong to him, and who opposes the rightful owner. The idea of opposition is the predominant one.
It is not easy to determine whether the Antichrist of S. John is personal or not. But the discussion of this question is too long for a note: see Appendix B.
even now are there many Antichrists ] Better, as R.V., even now have there arisen many Antichrists: the Christ was from all eternity (1Jn 1:1), the Antichrist and his company arose in time; they are come into being. We have a similar contrast in the Gospel: ‘In the beginning was the Word’; but ‘There arose a man, sent from God, whose name was John’ (Joh 1:1; Joh 1:6). These ‘many Antichrists’ are probably to be regarded as at once forerunners of the Antichrist and evidence that his spirit is already at work in the world: the one fact shews that he is not far distant, the other that in a sense he is already here. In either case we have proof that the return of Christ, which is to be heralded by the appearance of Antichrist, is near.
whereby we know that it is the last time ] Or, whence we come to know that it is the last hour: as in 1Jn 2:3 ; 1Jn 2:5 the verb indicates acquisition of and progress in knowledge. ‘Whence’ in the sense of ‘from which data, from which premises’ hardly occurs elsewhere in N.T. except perhaps in the Epistle to the Hebrews (1Jn 2:17, Joh 7:25, Joh 8:3), where the same Greek word ( ) is uniformly rendered ‘wherefore’ in both A.V. and R.V.
It is difficult to see what S. John could have meant by this, if by the ‘last hour’ he understood the Christian dispensation as a whole and not the concluding portion of it (comp. 2Ti 3:1). The multitude of false teachers who were spreading the great lie ( 1Jn 2:22) that Jesus is not the Christ, were evidence, not of the existence of Christianity, but of antichristianity. Nor could evidence of the former be needed by S. John’s readers. They did not need to be convinced either that the Gospel dispensation had begun, or that it was the last in the history of the Divine Revelation. The Montanist theory that a further dispensation of the Spirit, distinct from that of the Son, was to follow and supersede the Gospel, as the Gospel had superseded Judaism, the dispensation of the Father, was a belief of later growth. (For an account of this theory as elaborated by Joachim of Flora [fl. a.d. 1180 90] see Dllinger’s Prophecies and the Prophetic Spirit in the Christian Era, pp. 114 119.) In the Apostolic age the tendency was all the other way; to believe that the period since the coming of Christ was not only the last in the world’s history, but would be very brief. It was thought that some of the generation then existing might live to see the end (1Th 4:15-16; 1Co 15:51-52).
B. Antichrist
In the notes on 1Jn 2:18 it has been pointed out that the term ‘Antichrist’ is in N. T. peculiar to the Epistles of S. John ( 1Jn 2:18 ; 1Jn 2:22; 1Jn 4:3; 2Jn 1:7), and that in meaning it seems to combine the ideas of a mock Christ and an opponent of Christ, but that the latter idea is the prominent one. The false claims of a rival Christ are more or less included in the signification; but the predominant notion is that of hostility.
It remains to say something on two other points of interest. I. Is the Antichrist of S. John a person or a tendency, an individual man or a principle? II. Is the Antichrist of S. John identical with the great adversary spoken of by S. Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2? The answer to the one question will to a certain extent depend upon the answer to the other.
I. It will be observed that S. John introduces the term ‘Antichrist,’ as he introduces the term ‘Logos’ (1Jn 1:1; Joh 1:1), without any explanation. He expressly states that it is one with which his readers are familiar; ‘even as ye heard that Antichrist cometh.’ Certainly this, the first introduction of the name, looks like an allusion to a person. All the more so when we remember that the Christ was ‘He that cometh’ (Mat 11:3; Luk 19:20). Both Christ and Antichrist had been the subject of prophecy, and therefore each might be spoken of as ‘He that cometh.’ But it is by no means conclusive. We may understand ‘Antichrist’ to mean an impersonal power, or principle, or tendency, exhibiting itself in the words and conduct of individuals, without doing violence to the passage. In the one case the ‘many antichrists’ will be forerunners of the great personal opponent; in the other the antichristian spirit which they exhibit may be regarded as Antichrist. But the balance of probability seems to be in favour of the view that the Antichrist, of which S. John’s readers had heard as certain to come shortly before the end of the world, is a person.
Such is not the case with the other three passages in which the term occurs. ‘Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is the Antichrist, even he that denieth the Father and the Son’ (1Jn 2:22). There were many who denied that Jesus is the Christ and thereby denied not only the Son but the Father of whom the Son is the revelation and representative. Therefore once more we have many antichrists, each one of whom may be spoken of as ‘the Antichrist,’ inasmuch as he exhibits the antichristian characteristics. No doubt this does not exclude the idea of a person who should have these characteristics in the highest possible degree, and who had not yet appeared. But this passage taken by itself would hardly suggest such a person.
So also with the third passage in the First Epistle. ‘Every spirit which confesseth not Jesus is not of God: and this is the (spirit) of the Antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it cometh, and now is in the world already’ (1Jn 4:3). Here it is no longer ‘the Antichrist’ that is spoken of, but ‘the spirit of the Antichrist.’ This is evidently a principle; which again does not exclude, though it would not necessarily suggest or imply, the idea of a person who would embody this antichristian spirit of denial.
The passage in the Second Epistle is similar to the second passage in the First Epistle. ‘Many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even they that confess not Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the Antichrist’ ( 1Jn 2:7). Here again we have many who exhibit the characteristics of Antichrist. Each one of them, and also the spirit which animates them, may be spoken of as ‘the Antichrist;’ the further idea of an individual who shall exhibit this spirit in an extraordinary manner being neither necessarily excluded, nor necessarily implied.
The first of the four passages, therefore, will have to interpret the other three. And as the interpretation of that passage cannot be determined beyond dispute, we must be content to admit that the question as to whether the Antichrist of S. John is personal or not cannot be answered with certainty. The probability seems to be in favour of an affirmative answer. In the passage which introduces the subject (1Jn 2:18) the Antichrist, of which the Apostle’s little children had heard as coming, appears to be a person of whom the ‘many antichrists’ with their lying doctrine are the heralds and already existing representatives. And it may well be that, having introduced the term with the personal signification familiar to his readers, the Apostle goes on to make other uses of it; in order to warn them that, although the personal Antichrist has not yet come, yet his spirit and doctrine are already at work in the world.
Nevertheless, we must allow that, if we confine our attention to the passages of S. John in which the term occurs, the balance in favour of the view that he looked to the coming of a personal Antichrist is far from conclusive. This balance, however, whatever its amount, is considerably augmented when we take a wider range and consider ( a) The origin of the doctrine which the Apostle says that his readers had already heard respecting Antichrist; ( b) The treatment of the question by those who followed S. John as teachers in the Church; ( c) Other passages in the N. T. which seem to bear upon the question. The discussion of this third point is placed last because it involves the second question to be investigated in this Appendix; Is the Antichrist of S. John identical with S. Paul’s ‘man of sin.’
( a) There can be little doubt that the origin of the primitive doctrine respecting Antichrist is the Book of Daniel, to which our Lord Himself had drawn attention in speaking of the ‘abomination of desolation’ (Mat 24:15; Dan 9:27; Dan 12:11). The causing the daily sacrifice to cease, which was one great element of this desolation, at once brings these passages into connexion with the ‘little horn’ of Dan 8:9-14, the language respecting which seems almost necessarily to imply an individual potentate. The prophecies respecting the ‘king of fierce countenance’ (Joh 8:23-25) and ‘the king’ who ‘shall do according to his will’ (Joh 11:36-39) strongly confirm this view. And just as it has been in individuals that Christians have seen realisations, or at least types, of Antichrist (Nero, Julian, Mahomet), so it was in an individual (Antiochus Epiphanes) that the Jews believed that they saw such. It is by no means improbable that S. John himself considered Nero to be a type, indeed the great type, of Antichrist. When Nero perished so miserably and obscurely in a.d. 68, Romans and Christians alike believed that he had only disappeared for a time. Like the Emperor Frederick II. in Germany, and Sebastian ‘the Regretted’ in Portugal, this last representative of the Caesars was supposed to be still alive in mysterious retirement: some day he would return. Among Christians this belief took the form that Nero was to come again as the Antichrist (Suet. Nero 40, 56; Tac. Hist. ii. 8). All this will incline us to believe that the Antichrist, of whose future coming S. John’s ‘little children’ had heard, was not a mere principle, but a person.
( b) “That Antichrist is one individual man, not a power, not a mere ethical spirit, or a political system, not a dynasty, or a succession of rulers, was the universal tradition of the early Church.” This strong statement seems to need a small amount of qualification. The Alexandrian School is not fond of the subject. “Clement makes no mention of the Antichrist at all; Origen, after his fashion, passes into the region of generalizing allegory. The Antichrist, the ‘adversary,’ is ‘false doctrine;’ the temple of God in which he sits and exalts himself, is the written Word; men are to flee, when he comes, to ‘the mountains of truth’ ( Hom. xxix. in Matt.). Gregory of Nyssa ( Orat. xi. c. Eunom.) follows in the same track.” Still the general tendency is all the other way. Justin Martyr ( Trypho XXXII.) says “He whom Daniel foretells would have dominion for a time, and times, and an half, is even already at the door, about to speak blasphemous and daring things against the Most High.” He speaks of him as ‘the man of sin.’ Irenaeus (v. xxv. 1, 3), Tertullian ( De Res. Carn. XXIV., XXV.), Lactantius ( Div. Inst. vii. xvii.), Cyril of Jerusalem ( Catech. XV. 4, n, 14, 17), and others take a similar view, some of them enlarging much upon the subject. Augustine ( De Civ. Dei, xx. xix.) says “Satan shall be loosed, and by means of that Antichrist shall work with all power in a lying but wonderful manner.” Jerome affirms that Antichrist “is one man, in whom Satan shall dwell bodily;” and Theodoret that “the Man of Sin, the son of perdition, will make every effort for the seduction of the pious, by false miracles, and by force, and by persecution.” From these and many more passages that might be cited it is quite clear that the Church of the first three or four centuries almost universally regarded Antichrist as an individual. The evidence, beginning with Justin Martyr in the sub-Apostolic age, warrants us in believing that in this stream of testimony we have a belief which prevailed in the time of the Apostles and was possibly shared by them. But as regards this last point it is worth remarking how reserved the Apostles seem to have been with regard to the interpretation of prophecy. “What the Apostles disclosed concerning the future was for the most part disclosed by them in private, to individuals not committed to writing, not intended for the edifying of the body of Christ, and was soon lost” (J. H. Newman).
( c) Besides the various passages in N.T. which point to the coming of false Christs and false prophets (Mat 24:5; Mat 24:24; Mar 13:22-23; Act 20:29; 2Ti 3:1; 2Pe 2:1), there are two passages which give a detailed description of a great power, hostile to God and His people, which is to arise hereafter and have great success; Revelation 13 and 2 Thessalonians 2. The second of these passages will be considered in the discussion of the second question. With regard to the first this much may be asserted with something like certainty, that the correspondence between the ‘beast’ of Revelation 13 and the ‘little horn’ of Daniel 7 is too close to be accidental. But in consideration of the difficulty of the subject and the great diversity of opinion it would be rash to affirm positively that the ‘beast’ of the Apocalypse is a person. The correspondence between the ‘beast’ and the ‘little horn’ is not so close as to compel us to interpret both images alike. The wiser plan will be to leave Revelation 13 out of consideration as neutral, for we cannot be at all sure whether the beast (1) is a person, (2) is identical with Antichrist. We shall find that 2 Thessalonians 2 favours the belief that Antichrist is an individual.
II. There is a strong preponderance of opinion in favour of the view that the Antichrist of S. John is the same as the great adversary of S. Paul (2Th 2:3). 1. Even in the name there is some similarity; the Antichrist ( ) and ‘he that opposeth’ ( ). And the idea of being a rival Christ which is included in the name Antichrist and is wanting in ‘he that opposeth,’ is supplied in S. Paul’s description of the great opponent: for he is a ‘ man ’, and he ‘setteth himself forth as God. ’ 2. Both Apostles state that their readers had previously been instructed about this future adversary. 3. Both declare that his coming is preceded by an apostasy of many nominal Christians. 4. Both connect his coming with the Second Advent of Christ. 5. Both describe him as a liar and deceiver. 6. S. Paul says that this ‘man of sin exalteth himself against all that is called God.’ S. John places the spirit of Antichrist as the opposite of the Spirit of God. 7. S. Paul states that his ‘coming is according to the working of Satan.’ S. John implies that he is of the evil one. 8. Both Apostles state that, although this great opponent of the truth is still to come, yet his spirit is already at work in the world. With agreement in so many and such important details before us, we can hardly be mistaken in affirming that the two Apostles in their accounts of the trouble in store for the Church have one and the same meaning.
Having answered, therefore, this second question in the affirmative we return to the first question with a substantial addition to the evidence. It would be most unnatural to understand S. Paul’s ‘man of sin’ as an impersonal principle; and the widely different interpretations of the passage for the most part agree in this, that the great adversary is an individual. If, therefore, S. John has the same meaning as S. Paul, then the Antichrist of S. John is an individual.
To sum up: Although none of the four passages in S. John’s Epistles are conclusive, yet the first of them (1Jn 2:18) inclines us to regard Antichrist as a person. This view is confirmed ( a) by earlier Jewish ideas on the subject, ( b) by subsequent Christian ideas from the sub-Apostolic age onwards, ( c) above all by S. Paul’s description of the ‘man of sin,’ whose similarity to S. John’s Antichrist is of a very close and remarkable kind.
For further information on this difficult subject see the articles on Antichrist in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible (Appendix), and Dictionary of Christian Biography, with the authorities there quoted; also four lectures on The Patristical Idea of Antichrist in J. H. Newman’s Discussions and Arguments.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Little children – See 1Jo 2:1.
It is the last time – The closing period or dispensation; that dispensation in which the affairs of the world are ultimately to be wound up. The apostle does not, however, say that the end of the world would soon occur, nor does he intimate how long this dispensation would be. That period might continue through many ages or centuries, and still be the last dispensation, or that in which the affairs of the world would be finally closed. See the Isa 2:2 note; Act 2:17 note; Heb 1:2 note. Some have supposed that the last time here refers to the destruction of Jerusalem, and the end of the Jewish economy; but the more natural interpretation is to refer it to the last dispensation of the world, and to suppose that the apostle meant to say that there were clear evidences that that period had arrived.
And as ye have heard that antichrist shall come – The word antichrist occurs in the New Testament only in these Epistles of John, 1Jo 2:18, 1Jo 2:22; 1Jo 4:3; 2Jo 1:7. The proper meaning of ( anti) in composition is:
(1)Over-against, as antitassein;
(2)Contrary to, as antilegein;
(3)Reciprocity, as antapodidomi;
(4)Substitution, as antibasileus;
(5)The place of the king, or anthupatos – proconsul.
The word antichrist, therefore, might denote anyone who either was or claimed to be in the place of Christ, or one who, for any cause, was in opposition to him. The word, further, would apply to one opposed to him, on whatever ground the opposition might be; whether it were open and avowed, or whether it were only in fact, as resulting from certain claims which were adverse to his, or which were inconsistent with his. A vice-functionary, or an opposing functionary, would be the idea which the word would naturally suggest. If the word stood alone, and there were nothing said further to explain its meaning, we should think, when the word antichrist was used, either of one who claimed to be the Christ, and who thus was a rival; or of one who stood in opposition to him on some other ground. That which constituted the characteristics of antichrist, according to John, who only has used the word, he has himself stated. 1Jo 2:22, who is a liar, but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 1Jo 4:3, and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is not of God; and this is that spirit of antichrist. 2Jo 1:7, for many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
From this it is clear, that John understood by the word all those that denied that Jesus is the Messiah, or that the Messiah has come in the flesh. If they held that Jesus was a deceiver, and that he was not the Christ, or if they maintained that, though Christ had come, he had not come in the flesh, that is, with a proper human nature, this showed that such persons had the spirit of antichrist. They arrayed themselves against him, and held doctrines which were in fact in entire opposition to the Son of God. It would appear then that John does not use the word in the sense which it would bear as denoting one who set up a rival claim, or who came in the place of Christ, but in the sense of those who were opposed to him by denying essential doctrines in regard to his person and advent. It is not certainly known to what persons he refers, but it would seem not improbable to Jewish adversaries, (see Suicers Thesaur. s. voc.,) or to some forms of the Gnostic belief. See the notes at 1Jo 4:2. The doctrine respecting antichrist, as stated in the New Testament, may be summed up in the following particulars:
(1) That there would be those, perhaps in considerable numbers, who would openly claim to be the Christ, or the true Messiah, Mat 24:5, Mat 24:24.
(2) That there would be a spirit, which would manifest itself early in the church, that would strongly tend to some great apostasy under some one head or leader, or to a concentration on an individual, or a succession of individuals, who would have eminently the spirit of antichrist, though for a time the developement of that spirit would be hindered or restrained. See the notes at 2Th 2:1-7.
(3) That this would be ultimately concentrated on a single leader – the man of sin – and embodied under some great apostasy, at the head of which would be that man of sin, 2Th 2:3-4, 2Th 2:8-10. It is to this that Paul particularly refers, or this is the view which he took of this apostacy, and it is this which he particularly describes.
(4) That, in the meantime, and before the elements of the great apostasy should be concentrated and embodied, there might not be a few who would partake of the same general spirit, and who would be equally opposed to Christ in their doctrines and aims; that is, who would embody in themselves the essential spirit of antichrist, and by whose appearing it might be known that the last dispensation had come. It is to these that John refers, and these he found in his own age. Paul fixed the eye on future times, when the spirit of antichrist should be embodied under a distinct and mighty organization; John on his own time, and found then essentially what it had been predicted would occur in the church. He here says that they had been taught to expect that antichrist would come under the last dispensation; and it is implied that it could be ascertained that it was the last time, from the fact that the predicted opposer of Christ had come. The reference is probably to the language of the Saviour, that before the end should be, and as a sign that it was coming, many would arise claiming to be Christ, and, of course, practically denying that he was the Christ. Mat 24:5, many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. Mat 24:24, and there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets; and they shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. This prediction it is probable the apostles had referred to wherever they had preached, so that there was a general expectation that one or more persons would appear claiming to be the Christ, or maintaining such opinions as to be inconsistent with the true doctrine that Jesus was the Messiah. Such persons, John says, had then in fact appeared, by which it could be known that they were living under the closing dispensations of the world referred to by the Saviour. Compare the notes at 2Th 2:2-5.
Even now are there many antichrists – There are many who have the characteristics which it was predicted that antichrist would have; that is, as explained above, there are many who deny that Jesus is the Messiah, or who deny that he has come in the flesh. If they maintained that Jesus was an impostor and not the true Messiah, or if, though they admitted that the Messiah had come, they affirmed, as the Docetae did, (Note at 1Jo 4:2) that he had come in appearance only, and not really come in the flesh, this was the spirit of antichrist. John says that there were many such persons in fact in his time. It would seem from this that John did not refer to a single individual, or to a succession of individuals who should come previous to the winding up of the affairs of the world, as Paul did (2Th 2:2 ff), but that he understood that there might be many at the same time who would evince the spirit of antichrist. Both he and Paul, however, refer to the expectation that before the coming of the Saviour to judge the world there would be prominent adversaries of the Christian religion, and that the end would not come until such adversaries appeared. Paul goes more into detail, and describes the characteristics of the great apostasy more at length (2Th 2:2 ff; 1Ti 4:1 ff; 2Ti 3:1 ff) John says, not that the appearing of these persons indicated that the end of the world was near, but that they had such characteristics as to show that they were living in the last dispensation. Paul so describes them as to show that the end of the world was not to be immediately expected (2Th 2:1 ff), John, without referring to that point, says that there were enough of that character then to prove that the last dispensation had come, though he does not say how long it would continue.
Whereby we know it is the last time – They have the characteristics which it was predicted many would have before the end of the world should come. The evidence that it was the last time, or the closing dispensation of the world, derived from the appearing of these persons, consists simply in the fact that it was predicted that such persons would appear under the Christian, or the last dispensation, Mat 24:5, Mat 24:24-27. Their appearance was to precede the coming of the Saviour, though it is not said how long it would precede that; but at any time the appearing of such persons would be an evidence that it was the closing dispensation of the world, for the Saviour, in his predictions respecting them, had said that they would appear before he should return to judgment. It cannot now be determined precisely to what classes of persons there is reference here, because we know too little of the religious state of the times to which the apostle refers. No one can prove, however, that there were not persons at that time who so fully corresponded to the predictions of the Saviour as to be a complete fulfillment of what he said, and to demonstrate that the last age had truly come. It would seem probable that there may have been reference to some Jewish adversaries, who denied that Jesus was the Messiah (Robinson Lexicon), or to some persons who had already broached the doctrine of the Docetae, that though Jesus was the Messiah, yet that he was a man in appearance only, and had not really come in the flesh. Classes of persons of each description abounded in the early ages of the church.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
1Jn 2:18-23
Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists
St.
Johns last hour
The Apostle John is an old man; he has lived through a long day. The way of the Lord that he teaches is by this time a well-marked path, trodden by the feet already of two generations. Time has vindicated the bold inference that the aged apostle drew from his experience. The disciples of Jesus have known the truth, which abideth in us and shall be with us forever. St. John has but one thing to say to his successors: Abide in Him. As for the recent seceders from the apostolic communion, their departure is a gain and not a loss; for that is manifest in them which was before concealed (verses 18, 19). They bore the name of Christ falsely: antichrist is their proper title; and that there are many such, who stand threateningly arrayed against His servants, only proves that His word is doing its sifting and judicial work, that the Divine life within the body of Christ is casting off dead limbs and foreign elements, that the truth is accomplishing its destined result, that the age has come to its ripeness and its crisis: whence we perceive that it is the last hour. We may best expound the paragraph under review by considering in order the crisis to which the apostle refers, the danger which he denounces, and the safeguards on which he relies–in other words, the last hour, the many antichrists, and the chrism from the Holy One.
I. My children, it is the last hour–We perceive that it is the last hour. Bishop Westcott, in his rich and learned Commentary on this Epistle, calls our attention to the absence of the Greek article: A last hour it is ( )–so the apostle literally puts it; and the anarthrous combination is peculiar here. (St. Pauls, A day of the Lord is coming, in 1Th 5:2, resembles the expression.) The phrase seems to mark the general character of the period, and not its specific relation to the end. It was a period of critical change. The hour is a term repeatedly used in the Gospel of St. John for the crisis of the earthly course of Jesus, the supreme epoch of His death and return to the Father. This guides us to St. Johns meaning here. He is looking backward, not forward. The venerable apostle stands upon the border of the first Christian age. He is nearing the horizon, the rim and outmost verge of that great day of the Lord which began with the birth of the first John, the forerunner, and would terminate with his own departure: himself the solitary survivor of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb. The shadows were closing upon John; everything was altered about him. The world he knew had passed or was passing quite away. Jerusalem had fallen: he had seen in vision the overthrow of mighty Rome, and the empire was shaken with rumours and fears of change. The work of revelation, he felt, was all but complete. The finished truth of the revelation of the Father in the Son was now confronted by the consummate lie of heresy which denied them both (verse 22). He presided over the completion of the grand creative age, and he saw that its end was come. Clearly it was his last hour; and for aught he knew it might be the worlds last, the sun of time setting to rise no more, the crash of doom breaking upon his dying ears. The world passes through great cycles, each of which has its last hour anticipating the absolute conclusion. The year, with its course from spring to winter, from winter to autumn, the day from dawn to dark, image the total course of time. The great epochs and days of human history have a finality. Each of these periods in turn sensibly anticipates the end of all things. Many great and notable days of the Lord there have been, and perhaps will be, many last hours before the last of all. The earth is a mausoleum of dead worlds; in its grave mounds, tier above tier, extinct civilisations lie orderly interred. Each day of history, with its last hour, is a moment in that age of the ages which includes the measureless circumference of time.
II. The Apostle John saw the proof of the end of the age in the appearance of many antichrists. The word antichrist has, by etymology, a double meaning. The antichrist of whose coming St. Johns readers had heard, if identical, as one presumes, with the awful figure of 2Th 2:1-17, is a rival or mock-Christ, a Satanic caricature of the Lord Jesus; the many antichrists were not that, but deniers, indeed destroyers of Christ; and this the epithet may equally well signify. So there is no real disagreement in the matter between St. Paul and St. John. The heretic oppugners of Christ, starting up before Johns eyes in the Asian Churches, were forerunners, whether at a greater or less distance, of the supreme antagonist, messengers who prepared his way. They were of the same breed and likeness, and set forth principles that find in him their full impersonation. These antichrists of St. Johns last hour, the opponents then most to be dreaded by the Church, were teachers of false doctrine. They deny that Jesus is the Christ (verse 22). This denial is other than that which the same words had denoted fifty years before. It is not the denial of Jewish unbelief, a refusal to accept Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah; it is the denial of Gnostic error, the refusal to admit the Divine Sonship of Jesus and the revelation of the Godhead in manhood through His person. Such a refusal makes the knowledge of both impossible; neither is God understood as Father, nor Jesus Christ as Son, by these misbelievers. The nature of the person of Christ, in St. Johns view, is not a question of transcendental dogma or theological speculation; in it lies the vital point of an experimental and working Christian belief. Who is he, the apostle cries, that overcometh the world, except he that believes that Jesus is the Son of God? (1Jn 5:5); and again, Everyone that believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is begotten of God (1Jn 5:1). In passing from St. Pauls chief Epistles to this of St. John, the doctrinal conflict is carried back from the atonement to the incarnation, from the work to the nature of Christ, from Calvary to Bethlehem. There it culminates. Truth could reach no higher than the affirmation, error could proceed no further than the contradiction, of the completed doctrine of the Person of Christ as it was taught by St. John. The final teaching of Divine revelation is daringly denied. What think ye of the Christ?–what do you make of Me? is His crucial question to every age. The two answers–that of the world with its false prophets and seducers (1Jn 2:19; 1Jn 4:5), and that of the Christian brotherhood, one with its Divine Head–are now delivered in categorical assertion and negation. Faith and unfaith have each said their last word.
III. While the Apostle John insists on the radical nature of the assaults made in his last days upon the Churchs Christological belief, he points with entire confidence to the safeguards by which that belief is guaranteed.
1. In the first place, you,–in contrast with the antichrists, none of whom were really of us (verse 19)–you have a chrism from the Holy One (i.e., Christ)
; all of you know. the truth and can discern its verity (verses 20, 21). Again, in verse 27, The chrism that you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone be teaching you. But as His chrism teaches you about all things, and is true, and is no lie, and as it did teach you, abide in Him. Chrism is Greek for anointing, as Christ for anointed; St. Johns argument lies in this verbal connection. The chrism makes Christians, and is wanting to antichrists. It is the constitutive vital element common to Christ and His people, pervading members and Head alike. We soon perceive wherein this chrism consists. What the apostle says of the chrism here he says of the Spirit afterwards in 1Jn 5:7 : It is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth. And in 1Jn 4:6 he contrasts the influences working in apostolic and heretical circles respectively as the spirit of truth and of error. The bestowal of the Spirit on Jesus of Nazareth is described under the figure of unction by St. Peter in Act 10:38, who tells How God anointed (christened) Him–made Him officially the Christ–with the Holy Spirit and power. It was the possession, without limit, of the Spirit of truth which gave to the words of Christ their unlimited authority (Joh 3:34-35). Now out of that Holy Spirit which He possessed infinitely in His Divine fashion, and which His presence and teaching continually breathed, the Holy One gave to His disciples; and all members of His body receive, according to their capacity, the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot receive, but whom He sends unto His own from the Father (Joh 14:17; Joh 15:26, etc.). The Spirit of the Head is the vital principle of the Church, resident in every limb, and by its universal inhabitation and operation constituting the Body of Christ. The communion of the Holy Ghost is the inner side of all that is outwardly visible in Church activity and fellowship. It is the life of God in the society of men. This Divine principle of life in Christ has at the same time an antiseptic power. It affords the real security for the Churchs preservation from corruption and decay. For this gift St. Paul had prayed long ago on behalf of these same Asian Christians (Eph 1:17-23). This prayer had been answered. Pauls and Johns children in the faith were endowed with a Christian discernment that enabled them to detect the sophistries and resist the blandishments of subtle Gnostic error. This Spirit of wisdom and revelation has never deserted the Church. You know, all of you (verse 20)–this is what the apostle really says. It is the most remarkable thing in the passage. I have not written unto you, he continues, because you know not the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth. He appeals to the judgment of the enlightened lay commonalty of the Church, just as St. Paul when he writes, I speak as to men of sense; judge ye what I say. St. Johns chrism certainly did not guarantee a precise agreement in all points of doctrine and of practice; but it covers essential truth, such as that of the Godhead of the Redeemer here in question. Much less does the witness of the Spirit warrant individual men, whose hearts are touched with His grace, in setting up to be oracles of God and mouthpieces of the Holy Ghost. In that case the Holy Spirit must contradict Himself endlessly, and God becomes the author of confusion and not of peace. But there is in matters of collective faith a spiritual common sense, a Christian public opinion in the communion of saints, behind the extravagances of individuals and the party cries of the hour, which acts informally by a silent and impalpable pressure, but all the more effectually, after the manner of the Spirit.
2. To this inward and cumulative witness there corresponds an outward witness, defined once for all. You know the truth that no lie is of the truth That which you heard from the beginning, let it abide in you (verses 21, 24). Here is an objective criterion, given in the truth about Christ and the Father as Johns readers heard it from the apostles at the first, and as we find it written in their books. Believing that to be true, the Church rejected promptly what did not square with it. In the most downright and peremptory fashion St. John asserts the apostolic witness to be a test of religious truth: We are of God: he that knows God hears us; he that is not of God hears us not. By this we recognise the spirit of truth and the spirit of error (1Jn 4:6), Here is the exterior test of the inner light. The witness of the Spirit in the living Church, and in the abiding apostolic word, authenticate and guard each other. This must be so, if one and the self-same Spirit testifies in both. Experience and Scripture coincide. Neither will suffice us separated from the other. Without experience, Scripture becomes a dead letter; without the norm of Scripture, experience becomes a speculation, a fanaticism, or a conceit.
3. The third guarantee cited by St. John lies outside ourselves and the Church: it is neither the chrism that rests upon all Christians, nor the apostolic message deposited with the Church in the beginning; it is the faithfulness of our promise giving Lord. His fidelity is our ultimate dependence; and it is involved in the two safeguards previously described. Accordingly, when the apostle has said, in verse 24, If that abide in you which ye heard from the beginning, ye too shall abide in the Son and the Father, he adds, to make all sure, in the next verse: And this is the promise which He promised us–the eternal life! It is our Lords own assurance over again (Joh 8:51; Joh 15:4). The life of fellowship with the Father in the Son, which the antichrist would destroy at its root by denying the Son, the Son of God pledges Himself to maintain amongst those who are loyal to His word, and the word of His apostles, which is virtually His own. He has promised us this ( )—He who says, I am the resurrection and the life. No brief or transient existence is that secured to His people, but the eternal life. Now eternal life means with St. John, not as with St. Paul a prize to be won, but a foundation on which to rest, a fountain from which to draw; not a future attainment so much as a present divine, and therefore abiding, possession. It is the life which came into the world from God with Jesus Christ (1Jn 1:1-2), and in which every soul has its part that is grafted into Him. Understanding this, we see that the promise of life eternal, in verse 25, is not brought in as an incitement to hope, but as a reassurance to our troubled faith. These things have I written unto you, the apostle says, concerning those that mislead you (verse 26). Christs word is set against theirs. Error cannot prevail against the truth as it is in Jesus. Our little systems have their day; but the fellowship of souls which rests upon the foundation of the apostles has within it the power of an indissoluble life. Such are the three guarantees of the permanence of Christian doctrine and the Christian life, as they were conceived by St. John and are asserted by him here at his last hour, when the tempests of persecution and sceptical error were on all sides let loose against the Church. (George G. Findlay, B. A.)
The dispensations
How could those days of primitive Christianity be called the last days, inasmuch as since those days eighteen hundred years have elapsed, and still the worlds history has not reached its close? The answer is obvious. The whole period lying between the first advent and the present year of grace is but one oeconomy; and it is destined to be the last oeconomy, under which man is to be tried. What is a dispensation— is the administrator of a household, the lord of a family, he who dispenses to the household their portion of meat in due season. It is a certain measure, more or less, of moral light and help meted out by God, the great Householder, to His human family for the purpose of their probation. Any and every light and help which man has from heaven constitutes, strictly speaking, a dispensation. It seems, moreover, to be a principle of Gods dealings that the light and knowledge having been once supernaturally communicated, shall thenceforth be left to radiate from its centre, to diffuse itself among mankind, by the ordinary means of human testimony. Let us now proceed to review the leading dispensations under which mankind has been placed.
1. A single arbitrary restriction, issued merely as a test of obedience, was the first of them. The threat of death, in ease of disobedience, was a moral help to our first parents, tending to keep them in the narrow path of obedience and happiness. But it did not enable them to stand. They broke the commandment, and they fell.
2. The fall had in some mysterious manner put our first parents in possession of a moral sense, or faculty of discerning between good and evil, independently of Divine precept. To second and aid the remonstrances of this faculty, the heads of the human family had such bitter experience of the fruits of transgression as would abide with them to their dying day. Into this experience of the results of transgression was infused, lest man should despair, an element of faith and hope. Who shall say whether man, with these powers brought to bear upon him, may not retrieve his ground and return in true penitence to the bosom of his Father? So the dispensation of experienced punishment on the part of the parent, of ancestral precept on the part of the children began and run its course. But it proved an utter failure. The principle of sin, engendered in its primeval act, ate into the moral nature of man like a gangrene, until at length blasphemy and immorality stalked rampant upon the earth, and the vices of human kind, like the stature of the men of those days, towered to a gigantic height.
3. While the shades of guilt were thus deepening towards a night of utter depravity, and the few faithful ones in the line of Seth shone but with the feeble ray of glowworms amid the surrounding darkness–an additional dispensation was instituted in the announcement of the deluge to the Patriarch Noah, and the direction associated with it, to commence the building of the ark. What a stirring voice from heaven was this! What a Divine trumpet note of warning in the ears of a generation sinking deeper every moment into the fatal torpor of moral insensibility! At length, when Divine patience had had her perfect work the flood OEconomy came to its close amid outpoured torrents and gushing fountains of the deep.
4. When the stage of the earth had been cleared by the flood for another probation of the human race, a new measure of light and help was meted out by God, or, in other terms, a new dispensation was introduced. Human law was now instituted and sanctioned by heaven. It was now to be seen whether mans innate depravity would break through this barrier of restraint also.
5. It was succeeded by the dispensation of Divine law, promulgated with the most awful solemnity, and having annexed to it the most tremendous sanctions.
6. With Samuel and the succession of prophets, as many as spoke or wrote after him, commenced a new era, about three hundred and fifty years after the giving of the law. And of this dispensation the distinguishing characteristic is, that it was constantly expanding itself, that fresh accessions were continually being made under it to mans moral and spiritual resources, that it was a light continually increasing in brightness, shining more and more unto the perfect day when the Sun of Righteousness should rise with healing in His wings.
7. And now at length mens yearnings and anticipations were to be realised. The last hour of the worlds day–or, in other words, the final dispensation under which man was to be tried–was at hand. The great Deliverer appeared and revealed a wholly new arrangement, or series of arrangements, under and in virtue of which God would henceforth deal with man.
(1) Perfect absolution from the guilt of past sin–an absolution obtained in such a manner as should effectually strike the chord of love and gratitude in every heart of man.
(2) A communication of Divine strength through outward means.
(3) A perfect and explicit law embodying the purest morality which it is possible to conceive. But as man was still, under this final dispensation, in a state of probation, and a state of probation is not and cannot be a final or fixed state, the mind was still thrown forward by predictions of the Second Advent, to a period when He, in whom the heart and hope of Gods people is bound up, shall come again to receive them to Himself, and to visit them with eternal comfort, while vengeance, terrific vengeance, is taken upon all who, though the new dispensation has been proclaimed to them, shall not have taken shelter under the refuge which it provides. We have now passed in review the various dispensations under which man has been placed; and, thus furnished for the fuller understanding of our text, we revert to the solemn asseveration of the apostle, that this under which we live is the final oeconomy, and that with its close will terminate forever the probation of mankind. (Dean Goulburn.)
Last things
I. My hearers are coming nearer their last business day. Men will ask about you, and say, Where is so-and-so? And your friend wilt say, Have you not heard the news? and will take a paper from his pocket and point to your name on the death list. If things are wrong they will always stay wrong. No chance of correcting a false entry, or repairing the loss done to a customer by a dishonest sample, or apologising for the imposition inflicted upon one of your clerks.
II. Men are coming nearer to their last sinful amusement. A dissipated life soon stops. The machinery of life is so delicate that it will not endure much trifling.
III. Men are coming nearer to their last Sabbath.
IV. We come near the last year of our life. The world is at least six thousand years old. Sixty thousand years may yet come, and the procession may seem interminable; but our own closing earthly year is not far off.
V. We are coming nearer the last moment of our life. That is often the most cheerful moment. John Howard talked of it with exhilaration, and selected his own burial place, saying to his friend, A spot near the village of Dauphiney would suit me nicely. It is a poor time to start to get your house insured when the flames are bursting out of all the windows; and it is a poor time to attempt to prepare for death when the realities of eternity are taking hold of us. (T. De Witt Talmage, D. D.)
Antichrist—
Antichrist
This word is absolutely peculiar to St. John. The general use of (contra) and the meaning of the similarly formed word , lead to the conclusion that the term means adversary of Messiah. The Jews derived their conception from Dan 7:25; Dan 8:25; Dan 11:36; Eze 38:1-23; Eze 39:1-29. The name was probably formed by St. John. It was believed by the Jews that Antichrist would appear immediately before the advent of Christ (cf. chap. 2:22, 4:3; 2Jn 1:7)
. Our Lord mentioned pseudo-Christs as a sign (Mat 24:24). St. Paul gave a solemn warning to the very Churches which St. John now specially addressed (Act 20:29). St. John saw these principles and the men who embodied them in full action, and it was an indication for him of the last period. So far Christians had only learnt in general to expect the personal appearance of one great enemy of Christ, the Antichrist. In his Epistle St. John gives solemn warning that those heretics who denied the God-Man were not merely precursors of Antichrist, but impersonations of the anti-Christian principle–each of them in a true sense an antichrist. The term is used by no other sacred writer, by St. John him self only five times (1Jn 2:18, twice, 2:22, 4:3; 2Jn 1:7), and that specifically to characterise heresy denying the incarnation, person, and dignity of Christ as God-Man. Antichrist is the liar; his spirit and teaching is a lie pure and simple. The one Antichrist, whose coming was stamped into the living tradition of the early Church, and of whom believers had necessarily heard, is clearly distinguished from many who were already in existence, and were closely connected with him in spirit. Probably St. John expected the chief Antichrist, the theological antagonist of Christ, before the Personal Advent. In 2Th 2:1-17 we find the same idea of a singular individual of preeminent wickedness, while St. Paul does not call the Man of Sin Antichrist. In the Apocalypse (13-17) a delineation of an anti-Christian power; in St. Paul and in St. Johns Epistles of the eximious anti-Christian person. (Bp. Wm. Alexander.)
Antichrist and antichrists
It is a dangerous voyage which every Christian sails upon the sea of life. Sunken rocks, deceitful currents, and boisterous winds endanger his brittle bark. He needs constantly to beware that he makes not shipwreck of his faith. Here we are called to consider the danger arising from the seduction of false teachers. In the early Church these were the source of constant disquietude. Nor is it otherwise yet. It is melancholy to observe how little they are feared. Many trifle with them.
1. The apostle addresses himself to believers under the title of little children. There is a peculiar propriety in using such language to those who are warned. Little children need to be warned. They are ignorant and unsuspecting, because they are inexperienced. When they are tempted they possess little power of resistance. And once betrayed they have neither the skill nor the power to deliver themselves out of the evils into which they have been betrayed. It is to be lamented that in all these respects many Christians bear a strong resemblance to little children.
2. To these the apostle says, It is the last time, and this is an appropriate introduction to the warning he was about to give them. The meaning of the phrase will be seen by citing the parallel passage in Heb 1:1. The last time is therefore the day of Christ. It is the age of Christianity. And there are two views in which it may be appropriately so denominated. It is the last economy viewed in its historical relation to those which have preceded it. And it may be called so also in relation to the future. There will be no other economy. Then cometh the end, when Christ shall have delivered up the kingdom to God the Father. It is a high privilege that we live under an economy which is the completion, the perfection of all that went before it. But we must not forget we shall have no higher privileges than those which we now enjoy. If we are not saved by means of those we have we must perish.
3. Thus introduced, the apostle begins to announce his warning, Ye have heard that antichrist shall come. The very name is sufficient to awaken deep concern. We are at once given to understand that we must see a grand opponent to Him whom we delight to honour, and in whom is all our confidence. For His sake and our own, such an announcement should awaken our timely fear. As for Him, we cannot doubt his ability to overcome every enemy. But we may well fear for ourselves.
4. The apostle, however, comes closer to the case of those little children whom he addressed, and says, Even now are there many antichrists. Observe the distinction between this statement and the former one. The former is a prophecy, the latter is a fact. Antichrist shall come, but he has not yet been revealed. Time will be required for his development. But there are other forms of evil and other seducers who exist now. You are not to imagine that you are safe because the great antichrist has not yet appeared. The leaven was working which would in time corrupt the mass of professors, so insiduous and dangerous is error; and so necessary it is to watch its first rise and destroy it at the bud. In our own day we may well cry with the apostles, There are many antichrists. And who or what are they? They are all persons and things that are opposed to Christ and His people and His cause. And how can they be enumerated? Infidelity is antichrist, and pours contempt upon the truth. The scoffer is antichrist, and scorns the truth. All ungodly men are antichrists, and while they resist the truth themselves they tempt others to deny it. All errorists are antichrists, and obscure and oppose the truth.
5. The apostle applies this announcement of many antichrists to a practical use, saying in the next clause, Whereby we know that it is the last time. The words amount to a declaration that this mighty host with all their enmity to the truth should be a marked and prominent feature in the Christian era. Christianity is the best economy, and therefore it is the most hated and opposed by the wicked one.
6. We should beware that we are not found among these antichrists. And for our warning and guidance a description of them is given in the 19th verse–they went out from us. Once they belonged to the Church of Christ. They apostatised from the faith and practice of the gospel. But they were not of us, adds the apostle. They never were. They are not all Israel that are of Israel. They may have professed the faith, but in reality they had never embraced it. For, says he, had they been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us. This is certain. The nature of the Divine life makes it so. The just shall live by faith. The apostle concludes, But they went out, that they might be made manifest they were not all of us. On the whole, it was better they departed. It was better for themselves, that they may not be deceived by a name, but be led to penitence. It was better for others, that they might not be a burthen and hindrance to those with whom they were associated. And it was better for the cause of religion, that it might not be scandalised by their inconsistencies. (James Morgan, D. D.)
They went out from us, but they were not of us—
Anti-Christian
I. Where could these apostates go out from but the Church? If they had not been in it they could not have gone out from it. The Church they went out of was the true Church of Christ, in which the true and everlasting gospel was preached. And these persons had professed their faith in all the essential truths of the gospel. Yet their ambitious spirits were such they could not be content but they must bring in another gospel, contrary to what the apostles preached, pretending to have greater light into truth, and what they called the Person of Christ, and grace, than the very apostles themselves. They turned their back on Christ, His gospel, His ordinances, His apostles, His Churches, and everything belonging unto Him, and framed out of their own errors, heresies, whims, and fancies, a Christ and gospel for themselves. The apostle assigns the reason why they went out from the Churches in the way and manner they did–it was because they were not of one heart and soul with the Churches in the truth. As it was then, so it has been ever since. All the heresies which have tormented the Churches of Christ, down even to our present times, have originated from persons who have been in the Churches, who have departed from the Churches. From such as have made schisms and divisions in the Churches; and when any old error is newly revived, it in general springs from such persons as are disaffected to the true Churches of Jesus Christ.
II. How the apostle confirms his assertion–For if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us. How solemn! how awful! These antichrists came out of the apostolical Church of Jesus. They had been in it. It answered their end for a season to remain in the Churches to whom they had given in their names. It suited them to leave these Churches at such seasons; when they could, to distil their pernicious influences, as they thought and hoped, it would gain converts to them. These heretics left the Churches because they were not of them, only nominally. They might, and undoubtedly did, boast of superior light to all others in the doctrines of grace. They were slaves to their own lusts. They were covetous. They were greedy of reward. They were full of gainsaying.
III. Why these antichrists went out of the Church. It was that they might be made manifest, that they did not belong to the Church of Christ, let them make their boast of the same as they might. This was their end for their going out, but it was the Lords end in thrusting them out, and it might be some of these might have been thrust out by apostolic and also by Church authority. In the holy and secret mystery of the Lords providence it was evidenced they were not the Lords beloved ones. (S. E. Pierce.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 18. Little children, it is the last time] This place is variously understood. This is the last dispensation of grace and mercy to mankind; the present age is the conclusion of the Jewish state, as the temple and holy city are shortly to be destroyed. But as there are many who suppose that this epistle was written after the destruction of Jerusalem, consequently the words cannot, on that supposition, refer to this. Others think that should be translated, a most difficult, perilous, and wretched time; a time in which all kinds of vices, heresies, and pollutions shall have their full reign; that time which out Lord predicted, Mt 7:15, when he said, Beware of false prophets. And Mt 24:11, 12: Many false prophets shall arise, and shall deceive many; and because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. And Mt 24:24: There shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders. And Mt 24:25: Behold, I have told you before. Now the apostle may allude to these predictions of our Lord; but all these refer to a time antecedent to the destruction of Jerusalem. I am therefore inclined to think, whatever may be here the precise meaning of the last time, that the epistle before us was written while Jerusalem yet stood. See what is said in the preface on this head.
Antichrist shall come] Who is this antichrist? Is he the Emperor Domitian, the Gnostics, Nicolaitans, Nazareans, Cerinthians, Romish pontiffs, c., c.! Ans. Any person, thing, doctrine, system of religion, polity, &c., which is opposed to Christ, and to the spirit and spread of his Gospel, is antichrist. We need not look for this imaginary being in any of the above exclusively. Even Protestantism may have its antichrist as well as Popery. Every man who opposes the spirit of the Gospel, and every teacher and writer who endeavours to lower the Gospel standard to the spirit and taste of the world, is a genuine antichrist, no matter where or among whom he is found. The heresies which sprang up in the days of St. John were the antichrist of that time. As there has been a succession of oppositions to Christianity in its spirit and spread through every age since its promulgation in the world, so there has been a succession of antichrists. We may bring this matter much lower every enemy of Christ, every one who opposes his reign in the world, in others, or in himself, is an antichrist and consequently every wicked man is an antichrist. But the name has been generally applied to whatever person or thing systematically opposes Christ and his religion.
Many antichrists] Many false prophets, false Messiahs, heretics, and corrupters of the truth.
Whereby we know that it is the last time.] That time which our Lord has predicted, and of which he has warned us.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The last time; the time here referred to seems to be the destruction of Jerusalem, and the finishing of the Jewish state, both civil and ecclesiastical. In the Greek, the last hour, the approaching period of Daniels seventy weeks, as Mr. Mede understands it, in his Apostacy of the Later Times. Whereas therefore it was now a known and expected thing among Christians, that the eminent
antichrist, or antichristian state, (expressly foretold, 2Th 2:1-17), was to come, or take place; therefore the apostle says, ye, i.e. the generality of Christians,
have heard so much. So he says,
even now, as the forerunners of that eminent one,
are there many antichrists, ( foretold also by our Saviour, Mat 24:5,24), viz. noted heretics and seducers then in being: not such falsely assuming vicarious Christs, as only pretended to do that part which the Jews expected from their Messiah, the delivering them from the Roman tyranny, and so set up to be merely civil or secular Christs, having themselves never been Christians, but such as had revolted from Christianity, and now laboured fundamentally to subvert it, denying Christ to be come in the flesh, 1Jo 2:22; 2Jo 1:7; having been before professed Christians, as appears by the following words.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
18. Little childrensame Greekas 1Jo 2:13; children inage. After the fathers and young men were gone,”the last time” with its “many Antichrists” wasabout to come suddenly on the children. “In this lasthour we all even still live” [BENGEL].Each successive age has had in it some of the signs of “the lasttime” which precedes Christ’s coming, in order to keep theChurch in continual waiting for the Lord. The connection with 1Jo2:15-17 is: There are coming those seducers who are of the world(1Jo 4:5), and would tempt youto go out from us (1Jo 2:19)and deny Christ (1Jo 2:22).
as ye have heardfromthe apostles, preachers of the Gospel (for example, 2Th2:3-10; and in the region of Ephesus, Act 20:29;Act 20:30).
shall comeGreek,“cometh,” namely, out of his own place. Antichristis interpreted in two ways: a false Christ (Mat 24:5;Mat 24:24), literally, “insteadof Christ”; or an adversary of Christ, literally,”against Christ.” As John never uses pseudo-Christ,or “false Christ,” for Antichrist, it is plain hemeans an adversary of Christ, claiming to himself what belongsto Christ, and wishing to substitute himself for Christ as thesupreme object of worship. He denies the Son, not merely, likethe pope, acts in the name of the Son, 2Th2:4, “Who opposeth himself (Greek, “ANTI-keimenos“)[to] all that is called God,” decides this. For God’s greattruth, “God is man,” he would substitute his own lie, “manis God” [TRENCH].
are thereGreek,“there have begun to be”; there have arisen. These “manyAntichrists” answer to “the spirit of lawlessness (Greek)doth already work.” The Antichristian principle appeared then,as now, in evil men and evil teachings and writings; but still “THEAntichrist” means a hostile person, even as “THEChrist” is a personal Saviour. As “cometh” is used ofChrist, so here of Antichrist, the embodiment in his ownperson of all the Antichristian features and spirit of those “manyAntichrists” which have been, and are, his forerunners. Johnuses the singular of him. No other New Testament writer uses theterm. He probably answers to “the little horn having the eyes ofa man, and speaking great things” (Dan 7:8;Dan 7:20); “the man of sin,son of perdition” (2Th 2:3);”the beast ascending out of the bottomless pit” (Rev 11:7;Rev 17:8), or rather, “thefalse prophet,” the same as “the second beast coming up outof the earth” (Rev 13:11-18;Rev 16:13).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Little children, it is the last time,…. Or hour; not of the Jewish civil and church state, for that had been at an end for some time; this epistle was written some years after the destruction of Jerusalem; nor the last hour of the Gospel dispensation, or world to come, for this was but the first age of that; and much less the last hour of time, or of the present world itself, for that has been many hundreds of years since; but the last hour of the apostolic age. All the apostles were now dead, John was the last of them; perilous times were now coming on, impostors and heretics were rising apace, against which the apostle cautions his little children; and so still he writes to them, agreeably to their age and character, who, being such, were most likely to be imposed upon by those who lie in wait to deceive.
And as ye have heard that antichrist shall come; or “is coming”; and begins to show himself in the false teachers and deceivers, who were his forerunners; and this they had heard and understood, either from the words of Christ in Joh 5:43; or from the account the Apostle Paul gave to the Thessalonians concerning him, 2Th 2:3; or rather it may be from what, the apostle had said to the elders of the church at Ephesus, where the Apostle John now was, when he met them at Miletus, Ac 20:29,
even now there are many antichrists. The Syriac and Ethiopic versions read, “false Christs”; but such are not intended here, that set up for Messiahs, whom Christ foretold should arise before the destruction of Jerusalem, Mt 24:24; for that was now over, and those false Christs had arisen and were gone: if this sense could be admitted, Bar Cocab, in Adrian’s time, bids fair to be the false Christ, or Messiah, in the preceding clause, as the same versions there read; but such as were adversaries of Christ, as the Arabic version renders it, are meant, who set themselves against Christ, and were opposers of his person, incarnation, and office; who either denied that he was the Christ, or that he was come in the flesh, the truth of his incarnation, or his proper deity, or real humanity, such as Ebion, Cerinthus, and others. The apostle might well say there were many, since in his time were the followers of Simon Magus, the Menandrians, Saturnilians, Basilidians, Nicolaites, Gnostics, Carpocratians, Cerinthians, Ebionites, and Nazarenes, as reckoned up by Epiphanius. And hence we learn, that antichrist is not one single individual, but many; antichrist in the former clause is explained by antichrists in this; see 1Jo 2:22; and though the popes of Rome are, by way of eminence, the antichrist that should come, and which those deceivers were the forerunners of, and paved the way for; yet they are not the only antichrists, there were others before them, and there are many now besides them.
Whereby we know that it is the last time; the pure apostolic age was now going off, with the doctrines, discipline, and worship of it, which was easy to be discerned by the multitude of antichrists which now appeared; and it may well be thought to be the last time, or near the end of things with us, since almost every heresy is revived among us.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
| Concerning Antichrist. | A. D. 80. |
18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
Here is, I. A moral prognostication of the time; the end is coming: Little children, it is the last time, v. 18. Some may suppose that the apostle here addresses the first rank of Christians again; the juniors are most apt to be seduced, and therefore, “Little children, you that are young in religion, take heed to yourselves that you be not corrupted.” But it may be, as elsewhere, a universal appellation, introductive of an alarm to all Christians: “Little children, it is the last time; our Jewish polity in church and state is hastening to an end; the Mosaic institution and discipline are just upon vanishing away; Daniel’s weeks are now expiring; the destruction of the Hebrew city and sanctuary is approaching, the end whereof must be with a flood, and to the end of the war desolations are determined,” Dan. ix. 26. It is meet that the disciples should be warned of the haste and end of time, and apprised as much as may be of the prophetic periods of time.
II. The sign of this last time: Even now there are many antichrists (v. 18), many that oppose the person, doctrine, and kingdom of Christ. It is a mysterious portion of providence that antichrists should be permitted; but, when they have come, it is good and safe that the disciples should be informed of them; ministers should be watchmen to the house of Israel. Now it should be no great offence nor prejudice to the disciples that there are such antichrists: 1. One great one has been foretold: As you have heard that antichrist shall come, v. 18. The generality of the church have been informed by divine revelation that there must be a long and fatal adversary to Christ and his church, 2 Thess. ii. 8-10. No wonder then that there are many harbingers and forerunners of the great one: Even now there are many antichrists, the mystery of iniquity already worketh. 2. They were foretold also as the sign of this last time. For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect, Matt. xxiv. 24. And these were the forerunners of the dissolution of the Jewish state, nation, and religion: Whereby we know it is the last time, v. 18. Let the prediction that we see there has been of seducers arising in the Christian world fortify us against their seduction.
III. Some account of these seducers or antichrists. 1. More positively. They were once entertainers or professors of apostolical doctrine: “They went out from us (v. 19), from our company and communion;” possibly from the church of Jerusalem, or some of the churches of Judea, as Acts xv. 1, Certain men came down from Judea, and taught the brethren, c. The purest churches may have their apostates and revolters the apostolic doctrine did not convert all whom it convinced of its truth. 2. More privately. “They were not inwardly such as we are: But they were not of us; they had not from the heart obeyed the form of sound doctrine delivered to them; they were not of our union with Christ the head.” Then here is, (1.) The reason upon which it is concluded that they were not of us, were not what they pretended, or what we are, and that is their actual defection: “For, if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us (v. 19); had the sacred truth been rooted in their hearts it would have held them with us; had they had the anointing from above, by which they had been made true and real Christians, they would not have turned antichrists.” Those that apostatize from religion sufficiently indicate that, before, they were hypocrites in religion: those who have imbibed the spirit of gospel truth have a good preservative against destructive error. (2.) The reason why they are permitted thus to depart from apostolical doctrine and communion–that their insincerity may be detected: But this was done (or they went out) that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us, v. 19. The church knows not well who are its vital members and who are not; and therefore the church, considered as internally sanctified, may well be styled invisible. Some of the hypocritical must be manifested here, and that for their own shame and benefit too, in their reduction to the truth, if they have not sinned unto death, and for the terror and caution of others. You therefore, beloved, seeing you know these things before, beware lest you also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. But grow in grace, c., 2Pe 3:172Pe 3:18.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
It is the last hour ( ). This phrase only here in N.T., though John often uses for a crisis (John 2:4; John 4:21; John 4:23; John 5:25; John 5:28, etc.). It is anarthrous here and marks the character of the “hour.” John has seven times “the last day” in the Gospel. Certainly in verse 28 John makes it plain that the might come in the life of those then living, but it is not clear that here he definitely asserts it as a fact. It was his hope beyond a doubt. We are left in doubt about this “last hour” whether it covers a period, a series, or the final climax of all just at hand.
As ye heard ( ). First aorist active indicative of .
Antichrist cometh ( ). “Is coming.” Present futuristic or prophetic middle indicative retained in indirect assertion. So Jesus taught (Mark 13:6; Mark 13:22; Matt 24:5; Matt 24:15; Matt 24:24) and so Paul taught (Acts 20:30; 2Thess 2:3). These false Christs (Matt 24:24; Mark 13:22) are necessarily antichrists, for there can be only one. can mean substitution or opposition, but both ideas are identical in the word (in N.T. only here, 1John 2:22; 1John 4:3; 2John 1:7). Westcott rightly observes that John’s use of the word is determined by the Christian conception, not by the Jewish apocalypses.
Have there arisen (). Second perfect active indicative of .
Many antichrists ( ). Not just one, but the exponents of the Gnostic teaching are really antichrists, just as some modern deceivers deserve this title.
Whereby (). By the fact that these many antichrists have come.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Little children [] . See on ver. 13.
The last hour [ ] . The phrase only here in the New Testament. On John’s use of wra hour, as marking a critical season, see Joh 2:4; Joh 4:21, 23; Joh 5:25, 28; Joh 7:30; Joh 8:20; Joh 11:2 3, 27; Joh 16:2, 4, 25, 32. The dominant sense of the expression last days, in the New Testament, is that of a period of suffering and struggle preceding a divine victory. See Act 2:17; Jas 5:3; 1Pe 1:20. Hence the phrase here does not refer to the end of the world, but to the period preceding a crisis in the advance of Christ ‘s kingdom, a changeful and troublous period, marked by the appearance of “many antichrists.”
Antichrist. Peculiar to John in the New Testament. The absence of the article shows its currency as a proper name. It may mean one who stands against Christ, or one who stands instead of Christ; just as ajntistrathgov may mean either one who stands in the place of a strathgov praetor, a propraetor (see Introd. to Luke, vol. 1, p. 246, and note on Act 16:20), or an opposing general. John never uses the word yeudocristov false Christ (Mt 24:24; Mr 13:22). While the false Christ is merely a pretender to the Messianic office, the Antichrist “assails Christ by proposing to do or to preserve what he did, while denying Him.” Antichrist, then, is one who opposes Christ in the guise of Christ. Westcott’s remark is very important, that John’s sense of Antichrist is determined by the full Christian conception of Christ, and not by the Jewish conception of the promised Savior.
Cometh [] . The prophetic present, equivalent to is about to come. The same term is used of Christ (Joh 14:3; Joh 21:22; Revelation 22 20).
Are there [] . Rev., more correctly, have there arisen.
Whereby [] . Lit., whence. Only here in John. It is found in Matthew and Luke, and frequently in Hebrews, and not elsewhere.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Little children, it is the last time”. The persons addressed by the aged John as (paidia) little children, mature enough to be chastened for doing wrong, are told it is a last hour – as Gentile anti christ rebellion hastens the hour of judgment.
2) “And as ye have heard that antichrist shall come.” John had written in his gospel, relating the words of Jesus, how another should come in his own name, claiming to be the Christ, and would be received of many. Joh 5:43.
3) “Even-now are there many Antichrists”. (Greek Kai nun) means even now and continuing hereafter, in this last hour (Gentile era) many antichrists, posing as or against the Christ, have already arisen.
4) “Whereby we know that it is the last time.” The very presence of antichrists, persons posing as the appointed one, or specifically denying Him, was evidence to the aged apostle John that the hour of earth’s final judgement of the Gentile world was a daily matter of confrontation to Christians, leading to the time of the coming of the Antichrist, Daniel 7, 8; Dan 9:26-27; 2Th 2:3-8; Rev 13:4-8; Rev 19:20.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
18 It is the last time, or hour. He confirms the faithful against offenses by which they might have been disturbed. Already many sects had risen up, which rent the unity of faith and caused disorder in the churches. But the Apostle not only fortifies the faithful, lest they should falter, but turns the whole to a contrary purpose; for he reminds them that the last time had already come, and therefore he exhorts them to a greater vigilance, as though he had said, “Whilst various errors arise, it behooves you to be awakened rather than to be overwhelmed; for we ought hence to conclude that Christ is not far distant; let us then attentively look for him, lest he should come upon us suddenly.” In the same way it behooves us to comfort ourselves at this day, and to see by faith the near advent of Christ, while Satan is causing confusion for the sake of disturbing the Church, for these are the signs of the last time.
But so many ages having passed away since the death of John, seem to prove that this prophecy is not true: to this I answer, that the Apostle, according to the common mode adopted in the Scripture, declares to the faithful, that nothing more now remained but that Christ should appear for the redemption of the world. But as he fixes no time, he did not allure the men of that age by a vain hope, nor did he intend to cut short in future the course of the Church and the many successions of years during which the Church has hitherto remained in the world. And doubtless, if the eternity of God’s kingdom be borne in mind, so long a time will appear to us as a moment. We must understand the design of the Apostle, that he calls that the last time, during which all things shall be so completed, that nothing will remain except the last revelation of Christ.
As ye have heard that antichrist will come He speaks as of a thing well known. We may hence conclude that the faithful had been taught and warned from the beginning respecting the future disorder of the Church, in order that they might, carefully keep themselves in the faith they professed, and also instruct posterity in the duty of watchfulness. For it was God’s will that his Church should be thus tried, lest any one knowingly and willingly should be deceived, and that there might be no excuse for ignorance. But we see that almost the whole world has been miserably deceived, as though not a word had been said about Antichrist.
Moreover, under the Papacy there is nothing more notorious and common than the future coming of Antichrist; and yet they are so stupid, that they perceive not that his tyranny is exercised over them. Indeed, the same thing happens altogether to them as to the Jews; for though they hold the promises respecting the Messiah, they are yet further away from Christ than if they had never heard his name; for the imaginary Messiah, whom they have invented for themselves, turns them wholly aside from the Son of God; and were any one to shew Christ to them from the Law and the Prophets, he would only spend his labor in vain. The Popes have imagined an Antichrist, who for three years and a half is to harass the Church. All the marks by which the Spirit of God has pointed out Antichrist, clearly appear in the Pope; but the triennial Antichrist lays fast hold on the foolish Papists, so that seeing they do not see. Let us then remember, that Antichrist has not only been announced by the Spirit of God, but that also the marks by which he may be distinguished have been mentioned.
Even now are there many antichrists. This may seem to have been added by way of correction, as they falsely thought that it would be some one kingdom; but it is not so. They who suppose that he would be only one man, are indeed greatly mistaken. For Paul, referring to a future defection, plainly shows that it would be a certain body or kingdom. (2Th 2:3.) He first predicts a defection that would prevail through the whole Church, as a universal evil; he then makes the head of the apostasy the adversary of Christ, who would sit in the temple of God, claiming for himself divinity and divine honors. Except we desire willfully to err, we may learn from Paul’s description to know Antichrist. That passage I have already explained; it is enough now touch on it by the way.
But how can that passage agree with the words of John, who says that there were already many antichrists? To this I reply, that John meant no other thing than to say, that some particular sects had already risen, which were forerunners of a future Antichrist; for Cerinthus, Basilides, Marcion, Valentinus, Ebion, Arrius, and others, were members of that kingdom which the Devil afterwards raised up in opposition to Christ. Properly speaking, Antichrist was not yet in existence; but the mystery of iniquity was working secretly. But John uses the name, that he might effectually stimulate the care and solicitude of the godly to repel frauds.
But if the Spirit of God even then commanded the faithful to stand on their watch, when they saw at a distance only signs of the coming enemy, much less is it now a time for sleeping, when he holds the Church under his cruel and oppressive tyranny, and openly dishonors Christ.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES
1Jn. 2:18. Last time.R.V. last hour; probably it should be a last hour. The period after Christs coming in the flesh, however long it may prove to be, is regarded as the last time. If the apostles did expect a visible return of their Lord in their day, it is quite clear that the facts of Christian history have proved that the expectation was founded on misapprehension. The Christian dispensation is the last until there is another. Antichrist shall come.Cometh. It was the common belief of Christians that some individual antichrist would appear before our Lords second coming; and a similar notion is entertained by those who look for the second coming now. Antichrist is any person, or any thing, that opposes the establishment of Christs kingdom in the earth. So there have been antichrists in every age, and there are antichrists to-day. Opposition to Christ is the essential idea of the word; but it seems specially to refer to those who claimed that they themselves were christssuch as Barcochba. There is, however, a distinction to be drawn between false christs and antichrists. Compare Barcochba and Cerinthus. Are there many antichrists.Better, have there arisen. St. John would check the disposition to fix the association of antichrist to any one person. And his caution is greatly needed in our day. What we require to see more clearly is, that antichrist may be a person, but it need not be: it may be a sentiment, a teaching, a doctrine, a social influence.
1Jn. 2:19. Went out from us.The most dangerous form of antichrist is the heretical teaching of those who have belonged to Christs Church. They so easily make rival parties and sects. Perhaps St. John had in mind the Gnostics, who were recruited from members of the Christian Church. The Church in every age has been composed of nominal members and real members. Its peril has always lain in the uncertainty of the response of its nominal members to surrounding doubtful and evil influences. Those who have the unction from the Holy One, the Divine indwelling Spirit, are defended from the attractions of sectarianism and heresy. Their spiritual life, kept in health by the Holy Spirit, throws off all attacks of disease, as bodies do in which there is strong vitality.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.1Jn. 2:18-19
The Time of the Antichrists.It is the list time, or more correctly, it is a last hour. By this figurative term the apostle indicates a time of severe conflict. We precisely express his meaning when we say, Things are reaching a climax. Much mistake has been made by taking the expression last time in a strictly temporal sense. What St. John meant to say was this, Things are evidently coming to a point. When we come to deal closely and philosophically with the term last time, we are compelled to see that so long as God lives, and is actively working, there cannot be any such thing as a last time. There never has been, and there never can be. Seemingly last things were only last of parts of a series. There never yet was an end that was not also a beginning,just as you cannot destroy one particle of matter; you can only change its form and relations. The last times of St. John have come and gone, but the Christian ages continue; and every time in those ages when a great fight has arisen over some imperilled Christian truth has been a last time in St. Johns sense. The conflict over the filioque was a last time. The Arian struggle was a last time. The Reformation was a last time. Another point has too often escaped attention. The name Christ is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word Messiah, and therefore the term antichrist is strictly referable to any one who opposes or denies the Messiahship of Jesus of Nazareth, and all that it involved. But that was a particular phase of conflict which belonged exclusively to the times of St. John. For the Christian nations it is a controversy that is dead and gone, or lingering only, in a small way, in the controversy with the Jew. We have filled the term antichrist with our own meanings, and so have quite forgotten the very precise and limited connotation of the term in the time of the first Christian Church. In these verses three things are urged on attention.
I. The Christian Churches had been warned to expect antichrist.Ye have heard that antichrist shall come. Warnings had been fully given by our Lord Himself (Mat. 24:5; Mat. 24:23-24). And it could not have been otherwise, human nature being what it is. Was ever anything provided for humanity, or proclaimed to humanity, which was not opposed? Was ever scientific theory or theological doctrine presented without arousing contradiction? Enthusiastic men may take up some new thing, and imagine that, unhindered, it is going to carry all before it; but it never does. It succeeds at all only by forcing its way through and against obstacles. Christianity is a Divine force, but it works, and can only work, under human conditions. It was a dream that it would go forth to conquer, in such a sense as that; crushing all opposition, it would never have any fighting to do. Our Lord never for one moment encouraged that delusion. The result of His coming would be to set men at variance; and His truth would have as big a fight as His people. It must be so; and it was better that it should be so. Man never can get his best things save through conflict. And it is in wrestlings against antichrists that the Christian truth has been at once unfolded and preserved. And it will always be kept in similar conflicts.
II. The antichrists had come, and proved to be many.If the singular antichrist is employed, it is only as a collective or representative term. To find some single person answering to antichrist has been a kind of mania in the Church. There never was only one; there is not now; and there never will be. St. John does all that he can toward correcting that serious mistake when he says, even now are there many antichrists, suggesting as the conclusion of his sentence, and how many more there will be by-and-by. When once we have mastered the fact, that antichrists, in every age, are many, we are put upon the right lines for understanding what is meant by, and what is included in, the term. Whatever in the Church opposes the living authority and rule of the Lord Jesus is an antichrist. So it includes the moral opponent, the sensual teacher, quite as truly as the doctrinal opponent. And the very essence of the spirit of antichrist is thissetting some authority, based on the claims of self, against the authority of Christ.
III. The antichrists proved to be mischievous persons inside the Church.The significance of 1Jn. 2:19 as an account of the antichrists that were in St. Johns mind has been overlooked. We have not to look for them outside the Churches. They were persons who had been until recently members of the Churches. They were apostates, who had found their position within the Church impossible, and so had left the Church, and were now making themselves as actively mischievous against the Church as they possibly could. And now we know the two classes from which the antichrists were recruited.
1. The Judaisers; or those who wanted to make religionChristianitya formality instead of a life. And such persons are antichrists in every age.
2. The philosophers; or those who wanted to make Christianity an opinion rather than a life. And it is equally true that such persons are antichrists in every age. Under the Judaiser, the false liberty that nourishes immorality is sure to flourish. Under the philosopher, the false pride that puts self between the soul and the living Christ is sure to flourish. Christ is holiness and humility. Antichrist is sensual indulgence, and self-aggrandisement, and everything that tends to nourish such evil things.
SUGGESTIVE NOTES AND SERMON SKETCHES
1Jn. 2:19. Separation expressing Lost Harmony.Some actual cases of self-willed separation from the Church had evidently occurred, and had been a source of much anxiety and distress. The voluntary withdrawal of members from Church fellowship always puts a slight upon the fellowship, and brings a feeling of unrest and suspicion to the remaining members. There is always danger of those who leave making a party. And St. John therefore tries to quiet the unrest, and prevent the enlargement of the mischief, by helping the members to look aright on the removal of these self-willed persons. Sooner or later things out of harmony, or persons out of harmony, will be sure to separate. Outside forces may act for a while and keep in relation those who are not in harmony. But the forces never succeed in holding on very long. The natural separation persists in working on beneath all the restraints; and the moment that the force holding them together is released, they break asunder. It is so in the Church of Christ. Members that are out of harmony, either with the moral tone, or with the primary religious truths of the Church, cannot long maintain their association with it. As St. John expressed it, they are not of us. They are not in sympathy with us. Their aims are not ours; their cherished thoughts are not ours; their first principles are not ours. And they cannot help it; they must go from us. If we stand firm in our loyalty to Christ, they will be sure to find themselves uncomfortable, and make some occasion for going away. And this is the point in which the want of harmony will most evidently appear. Supreme in the mind of the Church will be, the holiest admiration of Christ, the most loving loyalty to Christ, the full recognition of the living presence of Christ, and the absolute submission of the whole soul and life to His authority. In whatever sense self rules mind, and feeling, and life, the man will be out of harmony with all this. He will be antichrist; and when he finds he is, he knows he will be best away.
ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 2
1Jn. 2:18. The Pope as Antichrist.It is singular to find that the See of Rome did not receive the appellation of antichrist first from its enemies the Protestants, but from its own leaders. Gregory himself (A.D. 590) started the idea by declaring that any man who held even the shadow of such power as the popes arrogated to themselves after his time would be the forerunner of antichrist. Arnulphus, bishop of Orleans, in an invective against John XV at Rheims (A.D. 991), intimated that a pope destitute of charity was antichrist. But the stigma was fixed, in the twelfth century, by Amalric of Bona, and also by the abbot Joachim (A.D 1202). Joachim said that the second apocalyptic beast represented some great prelate who will be like Simon Magus, and, as it were, universal pontiff, and that very antichrist of whom St. Paul speaks. Hildebrand was the first pope to whom this ugly label was affixed, but the career of Alexander VI. (Roderic Borgia) made it for ever irremovable for the Protestant mind. There is in the British Museum a volume of caricatures, dated 1545, in which occurs an ingenious representation of Alexander VI. The pope is first seen in his ceremonial robes; but a leaf being raised, another figure is joined to the lower part of the former, and there appears the papal devil, the cross in his hand being changed into a pitchfork. Attached to it is an explanation in German, giving the legend of the popes death. He was poisoned (1503) by the cup he had prepared for another man.Conway.
1Jn. 2:19. One Fold and One Shepherd.One evening I went out with a shepherd to collect his sheep. After they had been gathered together, and were being driven off the moor, I observed that there were some among them who did not belong to his flock. I particularly noticed, also, that he paid no attention whatever to these wandering strangers, urged forward though they were, by the barking dog, farther and farther from their rightful companions. At last, thinking I must have been mistaken in supposing they were not his, I pointed to one of them and said, Are those your sheep? And he answered No. I said unto him, Why then do you not separate them from the flock? And he answered and said, They will find out directly they are not of us, and then they will go away of themselves. And immediately I remembered the words of John, how he had said, They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.W. G. S.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER VI
TO WALK IN THE LIGHT IS TO SHARE
GODS ATTITUDE TOWARD JESUS
(The Third Test . . . The First Time)
1Jn. 2:18-28
A.
The Text
Little children, it is the last hour: and as ye heard that anti-christ cometh, even now have there arisen many anti-christs; whereby we know that it is the last hour, (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 made manifest that they all are not of us. (20) And ye have an anointing from the Holy One, and ye know all things. (21) I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and because no lie is of the truth. (22) Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is the anti-christ, even he that denieth the Father and the Son. (23) Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he than confessed! the Son hath the Father also. (24) As for you, let that abide in you which ye heard from the beginning. If that which ye heard from the beginning abide in you, ye also shall abide in the Son, and in the Father. (25) And this is the promise which he promised us, even the life eternal. (26) These things have I written unto you concerning them that would lead you astray. (27) And as for you, the anointing which ye received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any one teach you; but as his anointing teacheth you concerning all things, and is true, and is no lie, and even as it taught you, ye abide in him. (28) And now, my little children, abide in him; that, if he shall be manifested, we may have boldness, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.
B.
Try to Discover
1.
How our faith in Jesus as Gods only begotten Son is evidence that we are in fellowship with God.
2.
What is the meaning of anti-christ.
3.
What does our anointing from the Holy Spirit have to do with the truth that Jesus is the Christ.
4.
Who are those who went out from us.
5.
How does the promise of eternal life relate to our holding fast the message of the Gospel.
6.
How does being mindful of our anointing keep us from denying Jesus.
C.
Paraphrase
Little children! it is the last hour; And just as you have heard that an antichrist is coming. Even now antichrists have become many, Whence we perceive that it is the last hour: (19) From among us they went out, But they were not of us; For if of us they had been they would in that case have abode with us; But it came to pass in order that they might be made manifest, because all are not of us. (20) And ye have an anointing from The Holy One, Ye all know: (21)1 have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, But because ye know it, And because no falsehood is of the truth. (22) Who is the False One; Save he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? The same is the anti-christ. He that denieth the Father and the Son. (23) Whosoever denieth the Son neither hath he the Father: he that confesseth the Son hath the Father also. (24) As for you what ye have heard from the beginning in you let it abide. If in you shall abide that which from the beginning ye have heard ye also in the Son and in the Father shall abide. (25) And this is the promise which he hath promised unto us, the age-abiding life. (26) These things have I written unto you concerning them who would lead you astray. (27) And as for you the anointing which ye have received from him abideth in you, and ye have no need that anyone be teaching you; but as his anointing is teaching you, and is true and is no falsehood even just as it hath taught you abide ye in him. (28) And now dear children abide ye in him, in order that if he be made manifest we may have boldness and not be shamed away from him by his presence.
D.
Comments
1.
Preliminary Remarks
The argument of John in this passage was a simple one to himself and his first century audience. It is not so simple to us in the twentieth century. We have lost much of the theological background against which it was presented.
Briefly stated, Johns logic is this; we know it is the last hour. We know this because many antichrists have come. The reason the presence of the antichrists proves it is the last hour is that the antichrists are against Christ. Had He not come, they could not oppose Him. Their presence is proof He has come, and therefore, proof it is the last hour.
The Jews divided all time into two ages. The present age, which preceded the coming of the Messiah, and the last time or Day of the Lord, which would be ushered in with the coming of the Messiah. John here contends that the fact of the last hour is proven by the presence of antichrists. What he does not say, but what was, nevertheless, inherent in his use of the term last hour is that the presence of the last hour is proof that Christ has come.
This is the fact denied by the gnostics. It was their denial that Jesus is the Christ that made them antichrists.
The third test by which one may know that he has eternal life and is in fellowship with the Father is his attitude toward the Christ. To deny that He has come in the person of Jesus is to demonstrate an attitude that is antichrist. To confess that He has indeed come marks one as a child of God and in His fellowship.
2.
Translation and comments
2. a. Evidence of a last hour . . . 1Jn. 2:18
(1Jn. 2:18) Little children, it is a last hour, and just as you heard that an antichrist is coming, so also now many antichrists have become: whereby we know it is a last hour.
Today, no subject presented in the entire Bible is the object of more confusion than the last hour. To avoid becoming embroiled in this chaos, we must set aside all preconceptions and remember the historical purpose of Johns writing of this letter. We must let the author say, in his own language, what he would have us hear.
There is no the with last hour here. John describes that which has the nature of a last hour, rather than a particular last hour.
The terms last hour and last days seem to be closely related, sometimes interchangeable, throughout the Bible. In the early part of the Old Testament, they referred to the time when Israel would enter the Promised Land. In the prophets, these same terms are used for the time of the coming of the Messiah. In Act. 2:16ff, Peter applies this language, as employed by the prophet Joel, to the birthday of the church. This theme is repeated frequently through the Old Testament, and was a chief topic of speculation during the four hundred silent years between the Old and New Testaments.
Over the years of these usages, the phrase last hour came to have significance which was familiar to those who first read Johns letter. It is another of those well-known terms which John delights in pouring full of Christian meaning.
Last hour indicated, to them, the end of one era and the beginning of another. A last hour marked more than the time of annihilation. Destruction was followed by re-creating.
A last hour denoted a time of consummation. It was the time when an epoch of history reached that end toward which the providence of God had been moving it. The accomplishment of the one was also the beginning of another.
It is in this same vein that the Hebrew writer says, God . . . hath at the end of these days, spoken unto us in His Son . . . These days are the days when God spoke unto the fathers by the prophets. The consummation, the intended end of these days, was reached when, at the end of these days, God spoke to us in His Son. This also marked the beginning of the new age of grace as well as the end of the old age of law.
Paul says much the same things in Gal. 3:6-29. What God began in Abraham reached its intended end in the coming of the Christ. His coming, at the same time, marked the beginning of the new covenant age.
Luk. 24:44-47 leaves no doubt that Jesus saw His crucifixion and resurrection as the end of the Law of Moses, and the prophets, and the psalms. At the same time He saw it as the beginning of a new era when repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name unto all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.
The crux of Johns letter is: will an individual, in this last hour identify himself with that which is passing away or that which is new and eternal? 1Jn. 2:15-17, which immediately precedes this statement concerning the last hour, sets the choice clearly before us.
In recent years a great deal has been made of the assumption that the first century Christians, including the writers of the New Testament, were mistakenly anxious about the second coming of Christ. It has been said that their insistence upon preparation for His momentary return indicates they did not know whereof they spoke on the matter.
This is not a necessary conclusion. It is true that the New Testament writers had much to say about the second coming of Christ. It is equally true, however, that they saw this life as a period of preparation for that which would be ushered in in its fullness by His second coming. Since this preparation ends for the individual, either at the second coming or at his own death (depending entirely upon which comes first), it is just as important for one to be ready for the second coming now (in case of his own death) as then when He actually does come. This life of preparation is also the beginning of eternal life.
The passage of more than eighteen hundred years since John wrote it is a last hour, does not alter the necessity to realize that the final word of God concerning life and death has been spoken in Christ. Johns intention is that we treat every hour of the Christian age as a last hour. It has been five minutes until midnight since Pentecost!
As proof that it is last hour, John calls attention to the presence of many antichrists. Be alert here for a play on words: Christ, antichrist and christma (the anointing of believers.)
Some have supposed that The Antichrist is to be expected in the closing days of the Christian Era. Perhaps so. However, it is more reasonable to conclude from Scripture that the presence of antichrist indicates the Christian Era itself is a last hour. It is the end toward which Gods providence in human history has moved, It will issue in the beginning of whatever lies beyond in the age of ages.
It is significant that the designation antichrist is used only in the epistles of John; and nowhere else in the entire Bible. John mentions it in this passage twice, in 1Jn. 4:3 once and in 2Jn. 1:7 once. Some have identified Antichrist as an individual person with the Man of Sin, 2Th. 2:1-17, and the Beast of Rev. 13:1-18. The Bible does not make this identification!
There are those who believe that the Antichrist is to be expected in the time just preceding the second coming of Christ. Perhaps so. John does not use the term in this way. On the contrary, it would seem he calls attention to the many antichrists so as to correct a false teaching which made an individual Antichrist some sort of super monster. John says You have heard that Antichrist is coming, and immediately adds, . . . many antichrists have come.
Historically, the term antichristos in pre-Christian language meant either an opponent or adversary of Christ, or one who sought to put himself in Christs place. In the latter sense, the opposition is not open and clear cut. Rather, as in the case of the Gnostics against whose influence John wrote, it was insidious and subtle.
It has been the hallmark of devoted Protestantism from its inception to identify The Antichrist with the Pope. During, and just prior to, World War II, a number of Fundamentalist radio preachers were able to support their programs on the air by playing to the appetites of their listeners for the sensational satisfaction of their curiosity. This was done by identifying first Mussolini and then Hitler as The Antichrist. This they presented as proof that the last hour was upon us and the end of the world was imminent.
Many popes, as well as Hitler and Mussolini have long since passed from the scene. The end is not yet, but the subtle, insidious attempt of false teachers to lead astray the disciples of the Christ is still with us. Hereby we know that it is still a last hour!
To John, the subtle denial of the deity of Jesus, the false teaching which separated the human from the divine in Him and so opened the way to all sorts of sensualism in those who claimed to follow Him, was antichrist. Todays liberalism, and new morality fit perfectly Johns understanding of antichrist. They are not new, but are present, in varied forms, in every age.
Antichrist is the subtle but deadly denial of His deity by those who claim to follow Him. It is the removal of all moral absolutes, the opening of the gates of licentiousness for those who dare to wear His name!
b.
The antichrists and the anointed ones . . . 1Jn. 2:19
(19) They went out of us, but they were not of us: for if they were of us they would have remained with us: but (they went out) in order that they might be manifest that they all are not of us.
The gnostics, with their claim to superior enlightenment, were not really Christians. No one can be who denies Jesus as Christ.
The antichrists left the Christians fellowship because they were not all to be found in the ranks of the church. Johns statement is that even those who had been in the fellowship had left, which was proof that all of them were not of us. (We would have said none of them are of us.) Neither the gnostic in the church nor the gnostic outside the church is really of us. The physical presence of a false teacher in the assembly does not make him a Christian! The proof is that those who have been in the fellowship are leaving. They have not been excommunicated. They are simply not at home among people who believe in the deity of Jesus.
How timely this is for our day! We live in times which are historically the most significant for the church since the beginning of the Reformation. Old denominational lines are fading. Cutting across them all is the modern spirit of antichrist, which denies the inspiration of scripture, the deity of Christ and His Lordship.
It is not necessary to excommunicate these radicals of the left. It takes but little serious thought to recognize that they are not of us. Perhaps it is time for those who do believe the Gospel to simply acknowledge the situation which exists. Some who claim to be Christians, simply arent!
c.
The anointed ones know they are anointed . . . 1Jn. 2:20
(1Jn. 2:20) And you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know it.
The most prominent concept of the church presented in the New Testament is that it is the continuing presence of Christ, the Anointed One, on earth. The church is His body, the fullness of Him that filleth all in all. (Eph. 1:23) As such, it is to continue that which Jesus began, both to do and to teach. (Act. 1:1)
Individually, what we church members endure for His sake is to fill up that which is lacking of the afflictions of Christ . . . for His bodys sake, which is the church, (Col. 1:24) It is the church to whom God was pleased to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of Glory. (Col. 1:27) All that God has revealed or hopes to accomplish in Human history is now the stewardship of the church which John considers as the fellowship of anointed ones.
This conviction is in Johns reminder: You have an anointing. The word Christos, translated Christ, means Anointed One. It is not strange that those who are in fellowship with Him, who are the fulfilling fellowship (Eph. 1:23) called His body, should also share the anointing! Christians also are anointed ones! The word chrisma (anointed) has the same root as Christos (Christ).
Peter recognized this truth when, on Pentecost, he applied the prophecy of Joe. 2:28ff to the church. And it shall be in the last days, saith God, I will pour forth my Spirit upon all flesh . . . is fulfilled in . . . ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For to you is the promise, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call unto Him. (Act. 2:17ff) As A. T. Robertson puts it, This anointing is open to all Christians, not just a select few. Antichrists are against those anointed, both Jesus and His disciples! Saul of Tarsus learned this on the Damascus road.
The English version is misleading when it says ye know all things. The preferred reading is you all know it. That is, you all know (and this is the knowledge of experience) that you have the anointing. It is impossible to persuade one, who shares the anointing, that Jesus is not the Anointed One!
d.
The anointing is associated with truth . . . 1Jn. 2:21 (1Jn. 2:21) I did not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because every lie is not of the truth.
Paul intimates that John here affirms, Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things . . . (1Co. 2:14-15)
John is not writing because his readers do not know the truth but because they do know it. No matter that self-acclaimed intellectuals make lofty claims to special knowledge. Those who share the anointing of Christ through the gift of the Holy Spirit have done so because they first accepted the truth. They have known it from the beginning. The most unlettered Christian need not shrink before the self-proclaimed scholarship of anyone who denies the deity of Jesus! The knowledge of experience is more reliable than that gained by philosophical deduction.
e.
The decisive proof of falsehood . . . 1Jn. 2:22-23
(1Jn. 2:22) Who is the liar if not the one denying, Jesus is not the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one denying the Father and the Son. (1Jn. 2:23) Everyone denying the Son is not having the Father.
When John says, Who is the liar if not the one denying, Jesus is not the Christ? He has not stooped to name calling. The question is vastly more profound than that! Whoever denies the deity of the man, Jesus, has denied the fundamental reality of the universe. (Cf. Joh. 1:1-4)
Anyone making this denial is antichrist! (See on 1Jn. 2:18-19 above) Whoever denies the deity of Jesus denies the Father also! Jesus said as much Himself, as John records in His Gospel. (Joh. 5:19ff)
There are those today, as there were in Johns day, who believe they can share the Christian belief in God as Father without acknowledging that Jesus is His Son . . . not just a Son but the Only Begotten Son. Johns contention is that this is impossible.
Men know God, as Father, only through Jesus (Joh. 14:6-9). If Jesus is no more than a sort of super-philosopher, then men do not really know that God is Father at all. The idea that God even wanted to be Father came from Him.
Take away the divine Sonship of Jesus and you have destroyed Christianity at its base. The entire concept of brotherhood between men begins with the Fatherhood of God. If God is not the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, He is not the Father of anyone!
f.
The test of eternal life . . . 1Jn. 2:24-25
(1Jn. 2:24) As for you, what you heard from the beginning, let it remain in you. If in you is remaining what you heard from the beginning, you are also in the Son and are remaining in the Father.
What you heard from the beginning . . . The author calls us back beyond the rise of false teachers. He entreats us to set aside the confusion introduced by falsehood. We are to allow that to remain in us which was the original message. God is Light (See above on 1Jn. 1:5).
Since God is light, and all truth comes from Him, darkness and falsehood are dispelled from the one who holds firm this message. The messenger was the Son. We cannot hold fast the message without holding fast the messenger, Whosoever receiveth me, receiveth Him that sent me . . . (Luk. 9:48) These are Jesus words, and they are part of that which we have heard. (1Jn. 1:1) This is the standard by which truth is determined. Anyone denying it denies truth, and so is a liar.
To know God is to have eternal life. (Joh. 17:3) The promise is conditioned by the knowledge of Him whom the Son revealed. To deny Jesus is Gods Son is to forfeit all claim to the promise.
g.
Reminder of the anointing . . . 1Jn. 2:26-27
(1Jn. 2:26) These things I wrote to you concerning the ones leading you astray. (1Jn. 2:27) And the anointing which you received from Him is remaining you, (and you have no need that one keep on teaching you: but as His anointing is teaching you concerning all things, and it is true and is not a lie), and just as He taught you, you remain in Him.
Those who hold fast the message which they heard before the rise of the antichrists still have the anointing of the Holy Spirit. They are still the continuing presence of the Christ (the Anointed One) in the world of men. If this real presence of the Holy Spirit is kept in mind, it is the earnest of our inheritance . . . (Eph. 1:14) It is the down payment. In receiving this anointing we have already received the first installment of the eternal life which God has promised. With this in mind it becomes extremely difficult to reject the promise itself. So the anointing becomes a point of appeal by John for his readers to hold fast the truth that Jesus is the Christ.
Again, parenthetically, John underscores his claim that the consciousness of what they have already experienced is theirs. They have no real need to be reminded.
h.
Recurrent plea for persistence . . . 1Jn. 2:28
(1Jn. 2:28) And now, dear children, remain in Him, in order that if He should be manifest we may achieve boldness from before Him and not be shamed off from Him.
Johns convictions about Jesus are real. He is Gods Son. He is alive. He is coming again. Soon or late, and every eye shall see Him . . . (Rev. 1:7)
There will be no greater shame at His coming than that of those who once knew Him and then denied Him. There will be no greater joy than that experienced by the faithful at His coming.
E.
Questions for Review
1.
What is the significance of the fact that there is no the with last hour? . . . 1Jn. 2:18
2.
What is the purpose of I John?
3.
What do the terms last hour and last day seem to indicate in pre-Christian usage?
4.
In what sense may the entire Christian era be considered a last hour?
5.
What light do Act. 2:16ff and Gal. 3:6-29 throw on Johns discussion of a last hour in connection with the Christians anointing of the Holy Spirit?
6.
What is the literal meaning of the word Christ?
7.
If one is against Christ, is he not opposed to all those who are anointed of God?
8.
Who, besides Jesus, may be called anointed ones?
9.
Does the Bible anywhere identify antichrist with the Man of Sin?
10.
If the coming of Christ is the beginning of a last hour, is not the coming of those who oppose Him and His anointed ones also proof of the same?
11.
Are there antichrists in the world today? Explain.
12.
What proves that the antichrists were not of us? . . . 1Jn. 2:19
13.
What is the relationship of the church to the presence of Christ on earth today? . . . 1Jn. 2:20
14.
Who receives the anointing of the Holy Spirit?
15.
Is scholarship to be feared by the uneducated Christian? Explain . . . 1Jn. 2:21
16.
What is the decisive proof of falsehood? . . . 1Jn. 2:22-23
17.
Can one claim honestly to know God as Father while denying the deity of Jesus?
18.
Who first presented the idea that God is Father?
19.
What is the condition of eternal life presented by John in this passage? . . . 1Jn. 2:24-25
20.
What is the standard by which all truth is determined?
21.
What is the relationship between knowledge of God and presence of eternal life?
22.
How does the awareness of the presence of the Holy Spirit make the denial of Christ less likely?
23.
Who has most reason to be afraid and ashamed in the presence of Jesus? . . . 1Jn. 2:28
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(8) THE MANIFESTATIONS OF DARKNESS (1Jn. 2:18-28).
(a)
Signs whereby they should know the forerunners of the last time (1Jn. 2:18-23).
(b)
Exhortation to continue in the light (1Jn. 2:24-28).
After cheering his readers by stating the grounds of his writing, and the opinion which he has of them, he reminds them of the momentous epoch at which they are living, of the discriminating effect which it has had on mere nominal Christians, and of the signs by which such might be known, introducing, as in 1Jn. 2:12, a saving clause to separate his friends from the condemnatory category. The train of thought connected with the last hour is suggested by 1Jn. 2:17, the world passeth away, and is appropriate to the treatment of the general subject of light as it brings the manifestation of its contrary.
(18) The last time.Rather, hour. Until the visions of the Apocalypse, St. John naturally thought from Christs words, If he tarry till I come (Joh. 21:22), that he would see the last days before the Second Advent. Our Lord, in Mat. 24:36, distinctly asserted that not even the angels knew the day and the hour; and on this subject accordingly the Apostles were evidently left to their own conjectures. St. Paul expected a speedy return (1Th. 4:17); so did St. Peter (2Pe. 3:12-15). In the same way St. John thought that he recognised in the serious signs of his time that final period spoken of in Isa. 2:2; Mic. 4:1; Act. 2:17; 1Ti. 4:1; 2Ti. 3:1; and 2Pe. 3:3. And it was indeed true that with the approaching death of the last living witness of the Lords life, the new revelation was being finally closed, miraculous outpourings of the Spirit were ceasing, heresies and opponents were growing, and the lives of Christians were beginning to fade into the light of common day.
Antichrist.See Introduction. Of the terrible personage or power prophesied in 2Th. 2:1-12, Revelation 11, 13, 17, the liars already mentioned in 1Jn. 1:6, and afterwards in 1Jn. 4:3; 1Jn. 4:14; are regarded as forerunners. So might Hymenus and Philetus (2Ti. 2:17), Diotrephes (3Jn. 1:9), the Nicolaitanes (Rev. 2:6), or Simon Magus, Cerinthus, Ebion, any who opposed the teaching of Christ from within or without. (Comp. also Jud. 1:4.) See Excursus on 2Th. 2:3-12.
(19) They went out.The special instances in his mind were of men who had seemed to belong to the body of Christ, but were never really penetrated by His Spirit. (Comp. Mat. 13:3-7; Mat. 13:24-30; Mat. 13:47-50.) St. John is not pronouncing a general law that grace is indefectible; but in looking back on each case of apostasy he sees there must have been some element in the character not subdued to Christ. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb. 6:4-6) regarded it as possible for those who have been made partakers of the Holy Ghost to fall away. They might have partaken of the Holy Ghost in some degree, and yet not have been wholly Christian. Safety lies in the continual appeal to Christ.
(20, 21) But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.If the Antichrists had formerly any unction at all from Christ, the Holy One (comp. Joh. 15:26; 2Co. 3:17-18; Eph. 3:16; Php. 1:29), they must have grieved His Spirit. But St. Johns hearers were still holding the Head, and therefore had the divine instinct which guided them into all truth. If they trusted to the Spirit in simplicity, questions of morality and religion, all that concerned the soul, would be made sufficiently plain to them. He does believe this of them; humbly he begs them not to think that he distrusts them. If he did not think that they had the eye of their understanding spiritually enlightened, he would know that there would be no response in their hearts to his words, nor interest about them in their intelligence.
(22) Who is a liar?Rather, the liar, the enemy of light above ail others. St. John thrusts home his point by a lively personal reference. All who err from Christs teaching are liars; the greatest of all, he who may be called actually Antichrist, is he who denies that the Crucified is the Son of God. Such a man, with the opportunity of seeing and believing in the light, by refusing to do so loses the knowledge of God in the impressive beauty of His relation as Father revealed in Jesus. And a God who cannot be revealed, who has no Son, who cannot be heard or seen, is at best a cold abstraction.
(23) Whosoever denieth the Son. . . .The sentence in italics has good authority, and should stand as part of the text. Acknowledging here, as the opposite of that denial which involved such weighty consequences, implies, as Bede says, the confession of the heart, the mouth, and the deed.
After this description of the manifestations of darkness in their midst, and of his trust in them, he winds up with some forcible practical appeals, weaving together with concentrated power ideas which have already been suggested, and introducing the most familiar associations of the Lords teaching.
(24, 25) As for you (omit therefore), that which ye heard from the beginning, let it remain in you. If there remain in you that which ye heard from the beginning, ye in your turn shall remain in the Son and in the Father. And this is the promise which He Himself promised to us, the life eternal.
He turns over in his mind the question, What shall I say to my dear children about these sad apostasies that shake the faith and darken the heart? Well, there is nothing new to tell them; they have heard it all, only let it remain fixed and fresh in them! Then all he could wish will be theirs; they will be living and moving and having their being in the life and mind and love of the Son, the beloved Lord who has ascended, and through Him not less in the Father Almighty Himself. And the great promise which the Son made to them and to the world transcends all else, for it is of life eternal.
(24) Let that therefore abide.An echo of Joh. 15:7.
Which ye have heard from the beginning.Since each individual first felt the gospel brought home to his heart. Its message is always the same.
(25) Eternal life.The life which cannot be measured by days and years, but is the enjoyment of the blessedness of virtue. This is a present fact, begun as soon as the believer begins to be in Christ, growing more and more unto the perfect day as he walks more closely with God, secured for ever when he enters into his rest, and perfected in the glory of heaven. (Comp. Joh. 5:21-26; Joh. 10:10; Joh. 10:27-28; Joh. 11:25-26; Joh. 17:3.) That this life, depending on knowledge of God, is begun here, does not lessen the reasonableness of its being perfected hereafter, any more than its future completion prevents its present beginning.
(26) These things have I written.To remind them that he is still on the subject of the Antichrists, and to sum up what he has said about them.
(27) But the anointing.He reverts to 1Jn. 2:20-21 as a favourite ground of consolation and encouragement. Anointing played a great part in the physical life of Eastern races. The climate was dry, sultry, and enervating; unguents restored freshness, elasticity, and life to the parched and feeble frame. So, like dew reviving the verdure of the hill-side, or ointment restoring the vigour of muscles and sinews, the healing, soothing, influence of the Divine Spirit breathes about the children of God, unfolds the meaning of what they have heard, brings all things to their remembrance, and guides them into all truth. They needed not the pretended discoveries of false teachers; all they wanted was the unction of God to bring home what they had heard from the beginning.
Shall abide in him.Rather, abide ye in Him (imperative). These words are the conclusion to the four parallel clauses of the last half of 1Jn. 2:27. On the grounds that their minds were visibly alive to spiritual insight; that this insight was from God, a living power, witnessed to by the life of Christ and His Apostles, and all the phenomena of Christianity; that it was no mere human theory like the speculation of false teachers, demonstrably at variance with Christ; and, lastly, that it had already brought home to their inmost souls the priceless lessons of which they were aware, he earnestly charges them, Abide ye in Christ!
(28) And now.As in Joh. 17:5; Act. 3:17; Act. 4:29; Act. 7:34; Act. 10:5; Act. 22:16; 2Th. 2:6, these words mark a conclusion arising naturally from previous thoughts. As they have this holy anointing, and can exercise the Christian critical ability, and can see the truth, all they have to do is to let their whole being rest in the Son; this cannot be urged upon them too often, or too simply. Their safety depends on the exercise of their own will. (Comp. Joh. 15:1-6.)
Little children.Tenderly, as in 1Jn. 2:18.
When he shall appear.Rather, if Compare 1Jn. 2:18 for the thought of the possible nearness of Christs Second Advent. He passes to the first person plural, to place himself under the same experiences, laws, promises, hopes, fears, as his friends. It would be foreign to his nature to express a personal wish that he himself might not be ashamed on the score of their declension.
So ends the treatise on LIGHT. From the thought that the true fellowship excluded sin, he passed on to forbid the concealment of sin. for sin could not be altogether banished; then he spoke of the remedy for sin; then of the test of walking in the Light; so he was led to speak of the chief Christian characteristic; and then of the things to be forsworn. That led him to think of nominal Christians who had been unable to forswear them, and had therefore become enemies of Christ and beacons of warning. His friends needed no practical counsel except reminders of what they knew, and exhortations to exercise their moral choice by holding on to Christ.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
4. Nor must we accept the many antichrists whose coming marks the closing age, 1Jn 2:18-19.
18. Little children The third in the second triad of ages, commenced but unfinished in 1Jn 2:14. It now occurs because our apostle is about to mention a last time through which the younger portion of his audience will have passed and beheld its results.
The last time Literally, a last hour. It is in the Greek without the definite article, like similar phrases in 1Ti 4:1, 2Ti 3:1, (where see notes,) which indicate a closing period, (namely, of the apostolic age,) rather than the close of earthly time. The absence of the article does not, apart from the context, fully prove that the reference is not to the second advent; for in 1Pe 1:5 the second advent is unquestionably designated as a final period, and in Jud 1:18, it is called a last time. The second advent is of course a last hour, but a last hour is with no certainty the second advent. See note on 2Pe 3:3. It is by the context that the phrase here is fixed to mean a last hour rather than the last hour. A last hour bears the same relation to the last hour that the many elemental antichrists bear to the antichrist. Just as these many antichrists were typical of our final antichrist, of whom the readers had heard, so this last hour was typical of that last day of which they had learned. To make St. John say the close of the world is attested by the presence of the antichrist because there are now many antichrists is to make him reason inconsequently. These typical antichrists can only be adduced to prove a typical last hour. Huther incorrectly makes the apostle intimate that the many antichrists preceded the antichrist as immediate forerunner; but there is no reference in any word of the apostle to time, but to the relative character. Just so St. Paul declares that “the mystery of iniquity doth already work;” that is, the moral elements of the “man of sin” were now seminally existing in secret. Important on the antichrist and his time are our notes on Act 8:9; Act 6:5; 2Th 2:1-12; 1Ti 4:1-4. The error of Huther, Alford, and many others, in applying this last time to the second advent ought, we should suppose, to have been prevented by Paul’s express warning to the Thessalonians that such language did not imply Christ’s near approach; as well as St. Peter’s caution in 2Pe 3:8. See our Supplementary Note at close of Matthew 25. At the approaching close of his life our apostle saw that the withdrawal of his fellow apostles from this scene of things was the close of a historical cycle, and the development of the errorists foretold by Saint Paul had already approached; so that the hour was typical of that last period before the rise of antichrist, who precedes the last advent. It was just equivalent to St. Paul’s predictive phrase, addressed to this same Ephesus, “after my departure,” where these very many antichrists are foretold. To this we may perhaps add Grotius’s solution, that the last hour indicated the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish state. For although the destruction of Jerusalem was no organic part of the framework of the kingdom of God, and probably had past at the time this was written, yet it did, as predicted by Christ, coincide with and characterize as one element the closing apostolic cycle. See quotation from Hegesippus in note on 1Ti 4:1.
Ye have heard St. Paul early “told” the Thessalonians. 2Th 2:5.
Antichrist An epithet used by St. John alone, here and 22; 1Jn 4:3; 2Jn 1:7. The word is rightly interpreted by Huther as “not simply the enemy of Christ, but the opposition-Christ; that is, the enemy of Christ who, under the lying guise of Christ, endeavours to destroy the work of Christ.” The fundamental mark of this antichrist St. John twice declares to be the denial that Christ was “flesh,” 1Jn 4:3, and 2Jn 1:7. And this was based on that assumption of the inherent evil of matter, which forbade marriage among the Gnostics, and which appears at the present day in the celibacy of the pope and his immense army of priests throughout the world, and in the promulgation of the dogma of the immaculate conception of Mary. Huther is clear as to the identity of John’s antichrist with Saint Paul’s. “Rightly have almost all commentators understood that John understands under this enemy the same as Paul describes, 2Th 2:3, etc. The points which appear in the picture of Paul, and those in the explanations of John, so coincide and answer to each other that there need be no doubt about it. According to both, the manifestation discloses itself in the Church by an exodus from it; for John says, (1Jn 2:19,) the antichrists went out from us, and Paul (1Jn 2:3) speaks of a revealed, and a falling away. Both describe him as a God-opposing evil nature. Paul figures him as the man of sin, the lawless: John as the spirit of antichrist, in antithesis to the spirit of God; and says of the antichrists who are animated by him that they are of the world. Both characterize him as a liar who strives to make the lie victorious over the truth. Both represent that he appears in the last time before the second advent of Christ. Then, also, if the name antichrist, ‘ , is not strictly synonymous with the anti-lying, , yet even this point in Paul’s picture is so significant as to show how striking John’s naming of the enemy is. And when Paul describes the man of sin as showing himself that he is God, he clearly implies that spurious incarnation of God which the very name of antichrist implies.” And we may add, as Huther does not, that as St. Paul (2Th 2:2) expressly writes to show that he does not mean that either the man of sin or the day of Christ is really near at hand, so St. John does not mean by his last time and many antichrists that the second advent will be in his day.
Many antichrists last time As the antichrist identifies THE last time, so the many antichrists identify A last time.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Little children, it is the last hour, and as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now have there arisen many antichrists, by which we know that it is the last hour. 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 made openly displayed that they are all not of us.’
Now John addresses his readers as ‘paidia’ as in 1Jn 2:13. In 1Jn 2:28 he will return to teknia as in 1Jn 2:1; 1Jn 2:12. The aim is probably rather to avoid weary repetition than for any great doctrinal purpose. They are his beloved children in the faith.
‘It is the last hour.’ The idea of the ‘hour’ as a crucial time is regular in John (Joh 2:4; Joh 7:30; Joh 8:20; Joh 12:23; Joh 12:27; Joh 13:1; Joh 17:1; also Rev 17:12). The whole ministry of Jesus had led up to the final hour (Joh 13:1) which began with the Last Supper and led on through the cross (Joh 12:23; Joh 12:27) to His final glorification (Joh 17:1). So Jesus had had His hour, and now the church must face theirs.
To John the final hour had now come in which the final purposes of God would be completed. No one knew at this time how long the ‘last hour’ would last, although both Peter and John saw it as possibly lasting a long time, ‘a thousand years’ (2Pe 3:8-9; Rev 20:4). It was in God’s hands, and to God time was insignificant. But by all it was recognised that the coming of Jesus and His death, resurrection and exaltation, had ushered in the last times, the final stage of God’s purposes. It was ‘the last days’ (Act 2:17), ‘the end of the days’ (Heb 1:2), ‘the end of the times’ (1Pe 1:20), ‘the ends of the ages’ (1Co 10:11), so that ‘the end of all things is at hand’ (1Pe 4:7).
‘And as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now have there arisen many antichrists, by which we know that it is the last hour.’ John here wrote after Peter and Paul, and probably after the Book of Revelation. Both Paul (2Th 2:8-10) and the Book of Revelation (Rev 17:8; Rev 17:11-13; Rev 19:19-20) spoke of the final arising of a great Anti-god, setting himself up over against God to be worshipped. And Peter stressed the arising of false teachers who would face dreadful judgment (2 Peter 2). So John now either saw the antichrist as having come or as imminently coming and preceded by his forerunners. There are, he said, many antichrists, any of which might turn out to be the final antichrist, and seemed satisfied that this mainly fulfilled the prophecy of antichrists made by Jesus (Mat 24:5; Mat 24:24) and possibly even those made by himself in Revelation, although both he and Paul spoke of one great antichrist (or equivalent) who would sum up them all (2Th 2:8-10; Rev 17:8; Rev 17:11-13; Rev 19:19-20), and was prefigured by the Roman emperors (Revelation 13).
These antichrists were not on the whole great martial figures, but false teachers whose message to some extent aped and paralleled the Gospel, some even pointing to Jesus, but not as both true God and true man. However their sometimes rapid success may well have been seen as about to introduce the reign of Antichrist. The essence of the antichrist was deception and denial of Jesus as the Christ and thus of Father and Son (1Jn 2:22-23; 2Jn 1:7). But there had of course also been, and would be, emperors of Rome who had and would claim deity, to be gods and sons of gods, or were fervently acclaimed as such by many of the people, especially far from Rome where their divinity was treated seriously, and who when faced with the issue by implication denied that Jesus was the Christ. They too were antichrist.
But here, unlike in Revelation, his concentration is more on the false teachers who abounded and were hindering the churches’ message and establishing their rival widespread groups of adherents, and many flocked to them so that it seemed sometimes as though they would almost swamp the church of Christ. They were constant reminders that the end was imminent and could come at any time, although when they did not know.
‘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 made openly displayed that they are all not of us.’ These particular false teachers were men who had become attached to the Christian church, had seemed part of it, but had then left it and, taking those whom they had influenced with them, established ‘churches’ of their own, with their own particular extravagant doctrines which had possibly some resemblance to Christian teaching but without its practicality and down to earth reality, and essentially denied that the man Jesus was truly ‘the Christ’, God’s unique anointed One and only Son. Some possibly taught the reception of an esoteric ‘knowledge’ (gnosis) or a contact with varying succession of lights which lifted men beyond the ordinary, denying the true humanity and full Godhood of Jesus, and many were not concerned with morality. Such ideas would certainly be common later.
But what they were was revealed by the fact that they departed from a church in which at that time the basic doctrine had remained pure, because of the presence of apostolic men. They went out from them because they could not stomach basic Christian doctrine. It was too down to earth, too basic, too tied to earthly things. It was not exciting enough.
They wanted as it were to stretch their wings and introduce fantasy (as the so-called later ‘Gospels’ demonstrate). They did not want someone from God Who as God became man and exemplified and taught the resurrection of the body, and literally died, and called on men to repent of sin and be cleansed, and made strong ethical demands. They did not want to be limited to the life and teachings of a Jew Who had lived in Palestine and had physically been put to death. They wanted to rise above it all into a fantasy world of light, to free their souls with freedom to do as they wanted.
This is of course very much a generalisation, for there would be many forms of differing views as they mingled Christian ideas with those of other religions and philosophies, especially the mystery religions that abounded and strongly influenced men’s thoughts. But one thing was common to most. They departed from the church, sometimes by choice, and sometimes because they were expelled for false ideas by apostolic men who firmly defended certain basic truths. And thus they proved that they were not of the truth.
John has clear views about them. They “are of the world” (1Jn 4:5 a), they “have gone out into the world” (1Jn 4:1), they “speak from the world’s perspective” (1Jn 4:5 b), and “the world listens to them” (1Jn 4:5 c). They offer what the world wants, that which titillates the flesh or the mind. For their teaching does not bring men to obey God and keep His commandments, and live lives of unselfishness and goodness, but stresses either asceticism or laxity, both in order to free them from their fleshly bodies, and without too much emphasis on sin and the need to obey God’s laws as human beings in the flesh. Walking in the true light and living for God among men in accordance with His moral demands, and admitting their sinfulness and seeking forgiveness through the blood of the cross, did not appeal to them.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Warning Against False Religion and False Teachers ( 1Jn 2:18-29 ).
Having warned against the world which is under the control of the Evil One and will stultify their faith, John now warns against false teachings which will destroy their faith. He warns against that which sets itself up as an alternative to Christ, as an antichrist. For an antichrist (‘over against Christ’) is not necessarily someone who is antagonistic to Christ but rather someone who usurps Christ’s place, setting himself up instead of Christ. He may well honour Christ as a prophetic man, but he seeks to put himself in His place as the one to whom men should look.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Jn 2:18. Little children, it is the last time If these words are to be connected withthecontext,thenwe may consider them either as connected with the immediately preceding verses, and as containing one reason why those Christians were not to love the world; namely, that it was the last hour, and therefore the enjoyments thereof would continue but a little while; (See Jam 5:3.) or this verse may be connected with all that went before, and then the connection will stand thus: the apostle, having laid before the Christians some of the principal doctrines and duties of Christianity, takes care that the false teachers might not impose upon them, and draw them off from a steady adherence to these doctrines, and the faithful practice of the duties which he had been recommending. The word antichrist is in Scripture no where to be found but in this and in the second epistle of St. John. Some understand by it a false Christ, or one who unjustly assumed the character of the Messiah; others take it to signify an opposer of Christ. All those false prophets and corrupt teachers who arose before the destruction of Jerusalem, did not pretend to be themselves the Messiah or Christ: any person who opposes Jesus Christ, or corrupts the gospel, may be called an antichrist. See 2Co 11:13-15. The persons on whom St. John had his eye more particularly, denied that Jesus, who came in the flesh, was the Christ. See 1Jn 2:22. Ch. 1Jn 4:3. 2 John, 1Jn 2:7. They were, most likely, of the number of the Docetae, who held that Christ only seemed to have flesh, and to suffer. When the false teachers were spoken of collectively, they were, in the singular number, called the antichrist; when distinctively, in the plural, they were called many antichrists. The Jewish Christians had heard, that many antichrists, or false prophets, and corrupt teachers, would appear a little before the destruction of Jerusalem: the apostles, without doubt, mentioned this to their converts, generally speaking, wherever they came; but the most famous predictions of that kind were delivered by our Lord himself, Mat 24:1; Mat 24:51. Mar 13:1; Mar 13:37. Luk 21:5; Luk 21:38. And St. John’s putting them in mind that they had heard of these things, was in effect saying, “Take heed and beware, by attending to the admonitions which have been given you.” See 2 John, 1Jn 2:7-8. The strength of his argument lies here: Our Saviour had foretold, that just before the destruction of Jerusalem, antichrist would appear: a number of antichrists had accordingly appeared. Hence they might conclude, that it was the last hour; or that the desolation of the Jewish temple, city, and nation, was just at hand.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
1Jn 2:18 . The appearance of the shows that the last hour has come.
] not an address to the children (see on 1Jn 2:12-14 ), but to all readers. [154]
] may be the whole Christian era from the incarnation of Christ to His second advent. In the O. T. prophecy the appearance of the Messiah was promised (Isa 2:2 ; Hos 3:5 ; Mic 4:1 , LXX.: ; comp. also Act 2:16 ). Hence arose among the Jews the distinction of the two eras: ( ) and ( ), the former the time up to the appearance of the Messiah, the latter embracing the Messianic time itself.
In the N. T. are found, partly the former idea that Christ has appeared in the last time (Heb 1:1 ; 1Pe 1:20 ), partly also the distinction of these two periods, but in this way, that the does not close with the first appearance of Christ, but only with his Parousia, which coincides with the ; comp. Mar 10:30 ; Luk 20:34-35 ; Eph 1:21 .
Inasmuch as the period which begins with the birth of Christ is now the last preceding the , it may be described by the expression , as Calvin says: ultimum tempus, in quo sic complentur omnia, ut nihil supersit praeter ultimam Christi revelationem. This view is the customary one with the older commentators; Semler agrees with it, but the context is opposed to it; on the one hand, it results from 1Jn 2:8 ; 1Jn 2:17 that the apostle is writing with a presentiment of the Parousia of Christ; and, on the other hand, the conclusion of this verse: . . . , shows that the apostle cannot here mean the whole period extending from the first appearance of Christ to His second coming, but only a distinct time in it, namely, the time immediately preceding its termination; in favour of this also is the usus loquendi of the N. T.; comp. 2Ti 3:1 ; Jas 5:3 ; 1Pe 1:5 ; 2Pe 3:3 ; along with which it is to be observed that, especially in the Gospel of John, the day of judgment is called . Lcke, Neander, Baumgarten-Crusius, Gerlach, Erdmann, Myrberg, Ebrard, etc., have therefore rightly interpreted the expression as a description of this time. The hesitation to admit that the apostle was mistaken in his expectation of the nearness of the advent, has given rise to many a false interpretation. Socinus and Grotius think that is the time immediately preceding the destruction of Jerusalem ; this view approximates to that of Dsterdieck, according to which the last time before the commencement of the is meant, which had its beginning at the destruction of Jerusalem. But the scruple is not overcome by this, for chap. 1Jn 2:28 shows that John regarded the of the Lord as near, and not as distant, just as the other apostles, and especially also Paul, according to 1Th 4:15 , in view of which even Dsterdieck finds himself compelled to admit this; Besser urges the want of the article, and translates: “a last time,” i.e . the time before a special revelation of the judicial glory of Christ, in which the last hour before the universal final judgment is prefigured; but it is well known that the article is often wanting just with ideas which are definite in themselves; to which it may be added that the idea of such a succession of different epochs, which are to be regarded as special revelations of the judicial power of Christ, is nowhere found expressed in the N. T. [155] Oecumenius regarded it as likely that here is used = ; this explanation is found in Schoettgen (tempora periculosa, pessima et abjectissima), Carpzov, and others (similarly Paulus: it is a late, i.e. dark, and ever growing worse, time); whereas the distinction between these ideas is perfectly clear from 2Ti 3:1 : [156] .The result of an impartial exegesis therefore remains, that as the other apostles
John also expected that the advent of the Lord would soon take place. [157] It was only when the first generation of believers was already dead, without that expectation having been fulfilled, that in the consciousness of Christians the period till the coming of the Lord extended to an indefinitely distant limit, without, however, extinguishing the hope of His speedy advent; comp. 2Pe 3:4 ff.; but that later still the time which began with the appearance of false teachers was regarded as the last , is proved by Ignatius, ep. ad Eph. c. xi.
. . .] With the observation that it is the last time the apostle connects the other, that in accordance with what his readers have heard, that the would come, many have already come. Bengel supplies before : “et ita est,” and after : “adeo” (et ita est, sicut audistis, nempe antichristum venire: atque adeo jam multi, etc.); these supplements are, however, unnecessary, for the before is not the simple copula, but serves to mark the appearance of the as a fact corresponding to the . . .: “ as ye have heard, etc., so, accordingly, many are even now actually appearing. ” [158] , namely, by the apostolic declaration, which had been communicated to his readers (comp. 1Jn 2:7 ; 1Jn 2:24 ) either by John, or even earlier, by Paul especially, according to Semler by Jewish teachers, who were spreading false rumours of the end of the world (!). ( ) . . .] The present is put for the future; it marks what is still future as a certainly occurring event; Ebrard incorrectly translates by “is to come;” even in the passages cited by him: chap. 1Jn 4:3 ; Mat 11:3 ; Gospel of Joh 16:13 ; Rev 1:8 (why not 1Jn 1:4 ?), does not express simply the idea of the future; besides, Ebrard interprets correctly: “will one day appear.”
The prophecy that before Christ comes (hence before His Parousia) Antichrist will come, accordingly formed a part of the apostolic preaching, although it is not contained in the last discourses of Christ that have been handed down to us, for the and the , whose appearance Christ foretells, are not to be identified with the .
According to the view which has prevailed from antiquity, the and the are to be distinguished in this way, that the latter are only the of the former, in which for the first time the antichristian spirit which already animates them will be revealed in his full perfection and energy; Bengel, deviating from this, takes the expression as a collective idea: ubi Joh. antichristum, vel spiritum antichristi, vel deceptorem et antichristum dicit, sub singulari numero, omnes mendaces et veritatis inimicos innuit. Antichristus pro antichristianismo, sive doctrina, et multitudine hominum Christo contraria dicitur; with this interpretation Lange, Baumgarten-Crusius, Besser, and Myrberg agree. But neither here nor in 1Jn 4:1 ff. does John say that Antichrist has already come; here he merely indicates the fact that as corresponding to the announcement of the coming of Antichrist, and in the other passage it is merely stated that many are gone out into the world, and that the of Antichrist is already in the world. In the passage 2Jn 1:7 , “it is true that the explanatory clause refers so directly to the preceding ,” that it appears that “the identity is thereby indicated” (1st ed.); but this direct connection may, no doubt, be explained in this way, that he who speaks through the many is, according to John, no other than the one Antichrist; and even though John “neither describes the as the , nor the as the one in whom the principle that animates them is concentrated in highest potency,” it is to be remembered that John is speaking of the Antichrist here, not in doctrinal aspect, but only in order to show by the heretics, whom he calls , that the of Antichrist is already . [159] The name is not found in the Scriptures outside of the First and Second Epistles of John; only in the later ecclesiastical literature does it appear frequently.
That the prefixed does not express the substitutionary reference (as in ), but the reference of antagonism, is with justice now commonly recognised; but the prevailing translation: “enemy of Christ,” is grammatically inaccurate, as in substantive compounds formed with (in the antagonistic sense) the substantive is an object which by is described as standing in opposition to an object of the same kind. Thus, an is not an “opponent of philosophy” (Ebrard), or of philosophers, but a philosopher who is opposed to other philosophers, a hostile philosopher; comp. , , , , . . . [160] Accordingly, does not mean generally: the enemy of Christ, but the “ opposition Christ ,” i.e. that enemy of Christ who, under the false pretence of being the real Christ, seeks to destroy the work of Christ. [161] Almost all commentators have correctly supposed that John understands by this enemy the same as Paul speaks of in 2Th 2:3 ; the features which appear in the description of the Apostle Paul and in the statements of John correspond too closely to permit of this being doubted; according to both, his appearance in the Church is preceded by a falling away (John says in 1Jn 2:19 of the antichrists: ; Paul in 1Jn 2:3 speaks of an connected with his ); both ascribe to him a God-opposing, wicked nature (Paul calls him , ; John puts the in antithesis to the , and says of the antichrists who are animated by the former, that they are ); both characterize him as a liar, who seeks to establish the lie against the truth; according to both, he appears in the last time before the Parousia of Christ; even the names correspond with each other, for even though the name contains an important feature which is not expressed in the name , yet this very feature comes out so distinctly in the Pauline description, that it is clear how suitable John’s appellation of that enemy is; when, namely, Paul describes him as the , and afterwards says of him that he , , this points to the fact that he will represent himself as the incarnate God , and this is just what is indicated in the name .
[154] For the contrary, Ebrard appeals to the peculiarly childlike character of this section; but plainly this bears no other character than the whole Epistle, of which Ebrard himself says that it could only be understood by adults.
[155] Braune, who speaks of Calvin’s view and that of Besser as “worthy of notice,” expresses himself somewhat vaguely when he says: “The expression is to be taken prophetically, eschatologically, and has a value connected with the history of the kingdom , even a historical reference to the Parousia of Christ, as the beginning of the second era of the world, but no chronological reference to the date of the commencement of this Paronsia.” Clearly a quite arbitrary assertion.
[156] Peculiar, but artificial, is Bengel’s interpretation, which, moreover, rests on the false opinion that the children are here specially addressed: ultima , non respectu omnium mundi temporum sed in antitheto puerulorum ad patres et ad juvenes. Tres omnino horae erant, quarum una post aliam et inchoavit, et conjunetim continuato cursu ad finem se inclinavit. Patrum itemque juvenum hora statim absoluta fuit. Hinc puerulis Johannes dicit: ultima hora est. Hac ultima hora nos etiamnum vivimus omnes.
[157] In opposition to the “prejudice” that the apostles regarded the advent as so near, Sander thinks that they could not possibly have imagined that “all the great changes, transformations, and developments,” to which 2Th 3:3 , Rom 11:25-26 , Luk 21:24-26 allude, could be accomplished within a generation. But could not important events take place within a comparatively short period? As it was not the business of the apostles to foresee the course of history, it cannot be any reproach on them if they cherished the hope that the longed-for coming of the Lord would soon occur, especially as they formed out of this hope no peculiar doctrine, and did not venture to determine the time and the hour. The certainly extravagant assertion of Ebrard, that it would have been contrary to the order of God’s economy of revelation if John, at the time when he wrote his Epistle, had not expected the second advent of Christ in the near future, rests entirely on Ebrard’s views of the Apocalypse, from the visions of which, according to him, it could only be clear to the apostle for the first time that the of the Gospel of Joh 21:22 is to be understood of the coming of the Lord in a vision.
[158] Dsterdieck: “With the expectation . ., founded on the apostolic teaching, corresponds the fact already begun: . .”
[159] Weiss justly maintains, against Frommann and Reuss, according to whom John has spiritualized or confused the dogma of Antichrist, that he in no way denies the reality of the Antichrist, although Weiss thinks that John regards the prophecy of the Antichrist as fulfilled in this, that the spirit of Antichrist has come into the world, and in the false teachers is denying the fundamentals of Christian truth.
[160] From this it is clear that the rule laid down by Lcke, that “the word compounded with is the object of the opposition,” can by no means hold good for all compounds with , inasmuch as the examples adduced by Lcke: , , , , are not substantives; and, in the second place, does not express in them the idea of hostile antagonism.
[161] While Brckner agrees with the explanation given here, it is opposed by Braune; but he does not pay attention to the grammatical vindication. Besides, it is to be observed that the more particular definition of “false pretence” does not lie in the word itself, but certainly in the fact, since there is only one Christ; it is different in the case of the word .
REMARK.
On the various views of the Antichrist, see Lnemann on 2Th 2:1-12 , p. 204 ff., and Dsterdieck on this passage.
The Greek Fathers regard the Antichrist usually as a man who, as an instrument of the devil, imitates the true Christ, comp. Hippolyt. de consummat. mundi , c. vi. 14, c. xlviii.; Cyril, Catech. xv.; yet there is also found the incorrect view that he is the incarnate devil himself (comp. Theodoret, Epit. div. decret. c. xxiii., and Comment, in Dan. ii.; Hippolyt. c. xxii.).
Like the Parousia of Christ, so the appearance of Antichrist also belongs still to the future; of antichrists, as they had appeared in the time of John, there has never since been any lack; but the Antichrist has not yet come, and it was equally arbitrary for Grotius to regard Barkochba, or others Mohammed, or Luther the Pope, or Catholics Luther, and so on, as Antichrist.
Not merely rationalistic writers, but also Lcke, de Wette, Neander, and others, distinguish form and idea in John’s representation of the future appearance of the Antichrist. As the fundamental idea , they regard the thought that, equally with the development of Christianity, the evil will gradually increase more and more in its contest against Christ, until at last, when it has attained its highest summit, it will be completely conquered by the power of Christ. As the Form they regard the representation that this highest energy of the evil will finally appear in one single person. For such a distinction it is difficult, however, to show any justification, as Scripture itself gives no suggestion of it; it is therefore rightly rejected by Dsterdieck, Braune, Brckner.
In the words: , the apostle mentions the fact in which the expectation: , is beginning to be realized. The are the heretics who accept the lie described in 1Jn 2:22 ; but they bear that name because the animates them, and thus the Antichrist himself is already revealing himself in them, is not = coeperunt esse (Erasmus), but: “they have become,” i.e. they are already in existence. By means of the subordinate clause . . ., the connection between the two first parts of the verse is to be recognised.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
1Jn 2:18-27 . Warning against the antichrists, whose presence shows that the last hour has come. Description of them, and exhortation to believers to continue in that which they have heard from the beginning, combined with the testimony that they have known the truth.
This section stands in closest connection with the preceding one; for, in the first place, the preceding exhortation is occasioned by the thought that it is , as is evidenced by the appearance of the ; and, in the second place, the , of whom the apostle treats here, are, as it is put in chap. 1Jn 4:5 : .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
7. Warning and consolation against Anti-Christ
DESCRIPTION OF HIS FORERUNNERS, WHOSE APPEARANCE POINTS TO THE LAST TIME (1Jn 2:18-23). EXHORTATION OF THE FAITHFUL TO STEADFASTNESS IN THEIR ASSURANCE OF POSSESSING THE TRUTH AND ETERNAL LIFE (1Jn 2:24-28).
1Jn 2:18-28
18Little children, it is the last time25, and as ye have heard that26 antichrist27 shall come, even now are28 there many antichrists; whereby29 we know that it is the last time30. 19They went out from us31, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt32 have continued33 with us: but they went out34, that they might be 20made manifest that they were35 not all of us. But36 ye have an37 unction from the Holy One, and ye38 know all things39. 21I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth40. 22Who is a41 liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He42 is antichrist, that 23denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever43 denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father44: [but] he that acknowledged the Son hath the Father also45. 24Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning46. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father47. 25And this is the promise that he48 hath promised us49, even eternal life50. 26These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you51 27But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you52, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same53 anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth54, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him55. 28And now, little children, abide in him; that when56 he shall appear57, we may have58 confidence, and not be ashamed before him59 at his coming.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
The connection. The groundwork on which this portion of the Epistle rests is contained in the individualized addresses (1Jn 2:12-14), introducing both warning and consolation against the love of the world (1Jn 2:15-17), as well as in the subsequent warning and consolation against antichrist (1Jn 2:18-28). As the former particularly connected with the final clause whose kingdom is , so this connects with , , . The opening words in the sequel (1Jn 2:18) connect also with (1Jn 2:17). This portion which began (1Jn 1:5 sq.) with the Light-Being of God and the Light-walk of believers, concludes with a warning against the lie which is directed against the fundamental pillar of eternal truth, the glory of Christ. and an exposure of its attempt to annihilate the promise of eternal life. The address , 1Jn 2:18, applies to all the readers of the Epistle, and requires us to consider the sequel addressed to the whole Church (contrary to Bengel). It is incomprehensible that Ebrard on account of the peculiarly childlike character of this section should hold the opinion that the reference is only to the little ones, to children.
The last hour, 1Jn 2:18. This important and difficult idea, which is liable to many interpretations and has been variously understood, can only be understood and explained with reference to the whole usus loquendi current and the sum-total of clear views on the subject contained in the New Testament. It is not sufficient to refer the reader to Lange on Matthew 24., Moll on Heb 1:1, and Fronmller on 1Pe 1:5; 1Pe 1:20. Compare particularly Riehm, Lehrbegriff des Hebrerbriefs, pp. 72 sqq.; 204 sqq., and Dsterdieck ad loc.The representation of two ages of the world is rooted in the Old Testament idea which constantly recurs in prophetical passages, beginning with the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:1), especially in Jeremiah, denotes the most distant future, beyond which the eye cannot penetrate (Hitzig on Mic 4:1), and is therefore well rendered by in the end of the days. The prophets use it almost exclusively to denote the Messianic times. The LXX. translate it (Isa 2:2), (Gen 49:1), (Num 24:14), (Deu 4:30), (Deu 31:29). Hence comes primarily the talmudical and rabbinical idea of the and the ; inside these two ages of the world are the , the days of the Messiah, the Messianic age proper, which is alternately counted with either age of the world, and consequently may be either after or before the end of the days, or the end of the days itself. The Lord Himself distinguishes from (Mat 12:30), from (Mar 10:30; Luk 18:30); and this distinction, as well as Luk 20:34, sq. ( ) show most plainly that the earthly development-period of the kingdom of God preceding the second coming of Christ in glory, and beginning with the first coming of Christ in the flesh, belongs to the first age of the world, and that the future time is the time of the completed kingdom of God. According to this (Joh 6:39-40; Joh 6:44; Joh 6:54; Joh 11:24; Joh 12:48) is the day of the resurrection of the dead and the judgment, the last day of the first age of the world and the transition to the second. The turning-point between both ages of the world is the time of Christs return to judgment (Mat 13:39 sq.; Mat 13:49; Mat 24:3; Mat 28:20). Thus Paul also contrasts with , and the sufferings with the (Rom 8:18), and describes Christians as living looking for the blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ (Tit 2:12-13). The in which there shall come (2Ti 3:1), and the (1Ti 4:1), like the (Eph 2:7), denote the period immediately preceding the second coming of Christ. While, according to Paul, Christians still live outwardly in the first age of the world, yet are they ethically beyond it and the character of this present age of the world is described by him as tainted with immorality and alienation from God, Rom 12:2; 1Co 2:6; 1Co 2:8; 1Co 3:18; 2Co 4:4; Gal 1:4; Eph 2:2; 2Ti 4:10. He regarded also the present age of the world as running on towards its end since the first coming of Christ; hence he speaks of (1Co 10:11) having set in. We have not to inquire here whether he regarded the second coming of Christ to be near at hand.Peter considers his time as the (Act 2:17) and laid the first coming of Christ (1Pe 1:20 cf. 1Jn 2:5 : or , 2Pe 3:3 cf. Judges 18).So also James: (Jam 5:13 : ).In the Epistle to the Hebrews also the close of the first age of the world is described as beginning with the first coming of Christ (Heb 1:1), but the denotes the turning-point of the two ages of the world, Heb 9:26, and this turning-point is more particularly described as found in the sacrificial death of Christ on account of its important consequences (Heb 10:14; Heb 11:39-40), since that which is eternal, is now extant ( Heb 9:11; cf. Heb 5:14; Heb 10:1; Heb 10:18; Heb 6:5; Heb 12:22). The beginning of the new time has set in, but only the ideal and objective beginning; since the as to the is already extant in the redeemed, but will not enter into until the second coming of Christ (Heb 13:14), so that the first age of the world still continues outwardly and that consequently our time is only a transition-period; with respect to the ethical sense of these ideas we have here the point of contact between the Epistle to the Hebrews and the views of Paul.Johns must be understood as lying within the limits of these views. The use of instead of , the day which with God is equal to a thousand years (Psa 90:4; 2Pe 3:8), indicates a peculiar feature, and the absence of the Article leaves it undefined. We have to think of a period of time belonging to the last days or last times which exhibits their character in a concentrated form, and since the in the Gospel adverts particularly to the , the reference seems to be to peculiarly critical manifestations. If now we have to translate: it is the last hour, the reference to the antichrist and the antichrists is in admirable keeping with the announcements of the coming of false prophets and teachers for the purpose of temptation and trial, so that in them there already takes place a separation of true believers from false believers. Cf. Mat 24:24 sqq.; 1Ti 4:1 sqq.; 2Ti 3:1 sqq.Hence is neither=the season of the year, the wintry season of the world (Scholiast II), nor = (Oecumen., Schttgen: tempora periculosa, pessima et abjectissima, Carpzov and others), which is also forbidden by 2Ti 3:1. Bengels explanation that it denotes the last hour of Johns old age (ultima, non respectu omnium mundi temporum, sed in antitheto puerulorum, ad patres et juvenes), is a singular make-shift in order to guard John from the error that his prediction of the last hour had not been fulfilled. Nor can designate the time immediately preceding the destruction of Jerusalem (Socinus, Grotius), for the last time is not to be taken with such chronological precision. Nor is there any warrant for the assertion of Huther, that John wrote with presentiment of the second coming of Christ (an assertion based on what is said 1Jn 2:8 of the and 1Jn 2:17 of the , that they which simply marks the transitory character inhering in the and the ), since he writes only under the impression and with a sense of the transitoriness of the powers of this first age of the world, and that he indicates thereby the nearness of Christs second coming (Lcke, Neander, Baumgarten-Crusius, Gerlach, Ebrard, Huther). Hence we may say with Dsterdieck that John did not wish to supply a chronological but only a real definition [that is, one relating simply to the objectM.], which is clearly indicated by (1Jn 2:28), since is hardly the true reading there. The prophetical substance of the Apostolical declaration is true, the extension of the time from the real beginning (the destruction of Jerusalem, which does not disconcert John, and of the import of which, with reference to the history and the judgment of the world, his mind is fully made up), to the actual end of beings denotes rather no measure at all than one that is too short. The first Messianic transition-period inaugurated by the Saviour in the form of a servant, governed by Him and terminating the first age of the world is the , during which men pass through peculiar troubles, perils and conflicts on to the promised advent of the second world-age of glory. In this transition-period there are however peculiar hours of development, one of which had come when John wrote his Epistle. The term has therefore to be taken in a prophetical and eschatological sense; it has moreover an important bearing on the history of Christs kingdom and constitutes a historical reference to the second coming of Christ as the commencement of the second world-age, but not a chronological reference to the time when the second coming is to take place.Noteworthy is Calvins explanation: ultimum tempus, in quo sic complentur omnia, ut nihil supersit prter ultimam Christi revelationem, and with reference to the absence of the Article also that of Besser: the time before a special revelation of the judicatory glory of Christ prefiguring the last hour before the universal final judgment.
The Antichrist and the Antichrists, 1Jn 2:18.
1. The word occurs only here, 1Jn 2:22; 1Jn 4:3 and 2Jn 1:7. and its meaning has to be ascertained first philologically and then exegetically.
2. may mean both hostility and substitution. In the former case it denotes the antagonist of Christ, the antichrist, in the latter the pretender-Christ or pseudo-Christ. Thus is a set in opposition to another , and a , paid or given for something; so in Homer, denotes godlike, but other authors use it in the sense of adverse to the gods; one and the same word may then be used in both senses; but no word can have both meanings in one and the same place; hence we must not endeavour to combine the ideas of anti-Christ and pretender-Christ as Huther maintains (the enemy of Christ, who, under the lying appearance of being the true Christ, endeavours to destroy the work of Christ), although it must be conceded that the enemy of Christ appears at the same time with the pretension of being able to supply His place, of becoming His substitute, and that the pretender-Christ does occupy His place in hostility to Him. But the manifestly cannot be taken in this double sense. And still less allowable is it with Sander first to attach to the word in the Singular the sense of pseudo-Christ and mimic of Christ, and then immediately afterwards to make the Plural designate the enemies of Christ. We cannot get on purely philological considerations beyond the possibility of taking the word in one or the other of said senses.
3. We have to hold fast the fact that the word denotes persons. This is required of the Plural in 1Jn 2:19 : , , . But if the are persons, then must also be a person, for this is required by . Hence Bengels exposition is incorrect: Sive id vocabulum phrasis apostolica, sive sermo fidelium introduxit, Johannes errores, qui oriri possent, prvisurus, non modo antichristum, sed etiam antichristos vult dici; et ubi antichristum vel spiritual antichristi vel deceptorem et antichristum dicit, sub singulari numero omnes mendaces et veritatis inimicos innuit. Quemadmodumque Christus interdum pro christianismo (where?), sic antichristus pro antichristianismo sive doctrina et multitudine hominum Christo contraria dicitur. Antichristum jam tum venire, ita assentitur Johannes, ut non unum, sed multos, id quod amplius quiddam et tristius esse censet, antichristos factos esse doceat. Spe totum genus eorum, qui bonam aliquam aut malem indolem habent, singulari numero cum articulo exprimitur (Mat 12:35; Mat 18:17; Mat 18:29.). Igitur antichristus sive anti-christianismus ab extrema Johannis tate(see above: the last hour=old age!) per omnem sculorum tractum se propagavit et permanet, donec magnus ille adversarius exoritur. This view is adopted by Lange, Baumgarten-Crusius, Besser and others.
4. We have here before us a law of historical development, a fixed ordinance of the history of the kingdom. The point in question is the and the marks by which it may be known; the reference is to and to , to that which has happened , to that which is still to be looked for and has been announced ():
And as ye have heard (through the announcement of the Apostles) that an antichrist cometh, even now have there come into existence many antichrists ( ).It is by no means allowable to insert ita est before (Bengel): nor must the Present be put on a line with , so that the antichrist now cometh and is present even as the others also have appeared; nor must and , made equal in point of time, be only so distinguished from each other that the former comes aliunde, while these have come ex nobis. , they are become, they have come into existence, denotes the antichrists as a historical product, on whom the surrounding powers operating in time have operated. Hence it is not equal to coeperunt esse (Erasmus) but to they are become, they are existing.Ebrard incorrectly renders =is future, although he correctly explains it by=will some day appear. The Future is implied in the idea of coming and the Present indicates the certainty of the event. [Huther: The Present instead of the Future; it denotes the future as an event which is sure to occur.M.]. Accordingly the exist before the , who however is sure to follow them, and that which appears in the former, the , only in an isolated, undeveloped and feeble form, is gathered together by the latter in his individual person, and developed in a powerful form. In the course of time malice will so surely become intensified and opposition to God and Christ will reach such a degree of development that the existence of many antichrists warrants the certain result of a future concentration and formation of this spirit in one person.
5. The come out of the Christian Church, they have themselves been Christians before ( 1Jn 2:19); the antichrist, in like manner, will of course come forth from the ranks of the Christians, he will also be a man. Hence is not Satan himself (Pseudohippolytos, Theodoret); the idea of Satan becoming man is inexecutable, since the Eternal Word only, the Image of the Father, in which man has been created, can become man.
6. The antichrists deny that Jesus is the Christ (1Jn 2:22; 1Jn 4:3; 2Jn 1:7);) that He did not come in the flesh, that He is not the Son of God, that He is not of God (1Jn 4:14 sqq.; 1Jn 5:5 sqq.; 1Jn 5:20 sq.). The doctrine is the denial of the truth, the lie, they themselves are liars, and according to Joh 8:44, the children of the devil, of the father of the lie (1Jn 3:3-10). The Greeks strikingly observe: , , , (Theophylact) and (Scholiast II.). The antichrist and the antichrists are to be taken as expressly connected with Satan (Dsterdieck), and the two words here denote not substitution, but hostility to Christ exhibited in the form of eminent strength; the antichrist is pre-eminently the instrument and tool of Satan. Hence we have to exclude the exposition of Irenus, Hippolytus, Cyrillus and others, that the antichrist was tentans semet ipsum Christum ostendere, and mimicking Christ.
7. The comparison of this passage with 2Th 2:1 sq. (Hofmann, Heilige Schrift I., p. 307 sqq.) requires this explanation. The name used by John corresponds with the description given by Paul, , to denote his hostility with reference to his pretended ability to supply the place of God ( , ). John contrasts the with the , while Paul calls him , , . His appearing also is preceded by an , and he himself is the precursor of the , just as in John. But we must not overlook a difference belonging to this agreement. John speaks in a more general way, and uses less definite terms than Paul, who gives more distinct prominence to the person and approach of the dreaded and dreadful one; but he also refers to and as a power wielded by a living person, and specifies that for the benefit of the Church his progress will be arrested and his appearing delayed, thus pointing, like John, to a historical development.Remembering all these particulars, we have, first of all, to reject those expositions which limit the application of the subject to a solitary historical fact or a single personage, and regard this statement of the Apostle in the light of a prophecy of a church-historical fact. Thus the Greek expositors, and many others (Augustine, Luther, Calvin, al.) after them apply it to heretics or heresiarchs, e.g., to Simon Magus, Cerinthus, Ebion, the Gnostics, to Basilides, Valentinus, and others, the Nicolaitanes (Rev 2:6), to Diotrephes (3Jn 1:9.), Hymeneus and Philetus (2Ti 2:17), and Grotius actually applies it to Barcochba, Calov to Mohammed, Luther (Art. Schm. tract. de pot. et prim. pap, 39; cf. Melanchthon, Apol. Art VII. VIII., 23; XV. 18) to the pope, and Roman Catholics to Luther. All this is purely arbitrary and unwarranted, and not only depreciates the word of prophecy, but actually deprives it of the prophetical element, as if it had ceased to be valid. Secondly, we have also to reject the modern exposition (both that of rationalistic commentators and that of Lcke, de Wette and Neander) which insists upon separating the idea, that simultaneously with the development of Christianity, evil also would gradually increase in intensity, until having reached its culmination, it would be completely conquered by the power of Christ, from the form as here indicated, and that the form, as the mere shell, might be dropped. On the contrary, both the idea and the form have to be held fast, for we have here the expression of a law ever recurring in historical manifestations which belongs to the development of the history of the Kingdom [of God] up to and until the end of the time of Messiah and the Church, and this expression is so clearly and distinctly asserted that John feels warranted to draw the emphatic conclusion: whence we know that there is a last hour. By the appearing of many antichrists we may know and infer thence () as from a distinct premise, that there is an onward progress in the direction of Christs coming, which is preceded by the concentration of the antichristian element, thriving and luxuriating of course in different persons according to its different forms of manifestation. [On the different views of the antichrist see Lnemann on 2Th 2:1-12; p. 204 sqq., and Dsterdieck ad locum; also Trench, Synonyms of the N. T., p. 145 sqq.M.].
Relation of the Antichrists to the Church. First there is noted the fact that,
1Jn 2:19. From us they went out.The most natural and primary meaning of is that it designates the Apostle and his readers, consequently the Church, which is addressed by , and to be understood in . The reference is neither to the Jews (Grotius, Rickli), nor to the Apostles only (Spener, Besser), nor only to the Church with exclusion of the children (Ebrard). Apart from the form , which in this very verb is by no means uncommon in the New Testament (Winer, pp. 86, 87), the sense is various: prodire, exire, egredi, secedere. Two ideas play into each other: origin and separation, coming out and going away. The nature of the who are engaged in the , not , requires us to translate secesserunt, evaserunt (Augustine, Bede, Erasmus, Lcke, Dsterdieck, Ebrard, Huther). Prodierunt (Vulgate, al.) misapprehends the origin of the antichrists, and denotes origin only. does not point to their development and origin, but only to their separation, their apostasy, which requires us to regard as their apostasy from the Church; , to be sure, shows that they are within that Church from which they have now separated. This is brought out by the emphatic position of before the verb (Huther), for in connection with the verb merely denotes the circle, the fellowship from which they have separated. John does not indicate the extent to which that formal separation has been carried; still implies that they had not only opposed the Apostolical doctrine (Beza: ad mutationem non loci, sed doctrin pertinet), but also those who, by the faithful preservation of the unadulterated Gospel, had proved themselves to be children of God(Huther).
But they were not of us. indicates the internal relation. Here the idea of origin combines with that of appertaining and affinity. (Winer, pp. 462, 472, ) denotes the strong opposition of and . While the former simply betokens external origin and coming out from, the latter indicates internal relationship; they were the former, not the latter; the aforesaid fact expressly denies this internal relation. Both origin (coming from) and relationship (affinity, appertaining to) are contained in , (1Jn 2:16) and in (Joh 8:42; Joh 16:28; while , Joh 13:3, and , Joh 16:27, denote only the former.) [Augustine: Quandoquidem adhuc curatur corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi, et sanitas perfecta non erit nisi in resurrectione mortuorum; sic sunt in corpore Christi, quomodo humores mali. Quando evomuntur, tunc revelatur corpus: sic et mali quando exeunt, tunc revelatur ecclesia. Et dicit quando eos evomit atque projicit corpus, ex me exierunt humores isti, sed non erant ex me. Quid est, non erant ex me ? Non de carne mea prcisi sunt, sed pectus mihi premebant dum inessent.M.]. But John here sharply contrasts the two and excludes the one by the other, adding moreover,
For if they had been of us, they would have abode with us.Consequently, they had been , they had belonged to the Christians, they had lived among and with the Christians, they were Christians outwardly and to be considered, as such. Although they had been , they were not , for in that case they would have abode . On the very frequent omission of the augment in the Pluperfect see Winer, p. 85. On the dogmatical and ethical import of this passage, see below in Doctrinal and Ethical, especially sub. Nos. 4. 5.
Butthat they might be made manifest, that not all are of us.Here is an imperfect and involved construction. After we have of course to supply the thought suggested by the previous words: but they did not abide with us, that(Huther, Winer, Grammar p. 333. where may be found the corresponding illustrations Joh 13:18 : , ();Joh 15:25 : , ()). In general would have to be supplied, which would however depend on the context for its meaning, as in Joh 1:8 : () ; Joh 9:3 : (but he was born blind) . But de Wette has very correctly pointed out that two sentences are here interlaced, and Huther has rightly arranged them thus: 1, , 2, . The secession of the antichrists has, taken place and constitutes an event that does not take place without some providential design, an event in which God the Lord takes an active part both as Ruler and Judge, hence , to the end that, in order that. The Apostles design is to mark a purpose and not a consequence, as Lange and Paulus maintain without any reason for their view. The purpose is first, that they shall manifest themselves as those who do not sustain to us an inward and ethical relation of kinship and appertainment, and secondly, that it shall become manifest in general that not all those who are in the Church and outwardly belong to it ( , in ecclesia) do also belong to it inwardly ( , de ecclesia). We have to connect in the sense of nonnulli; for if we were to connect so that the negation would belong to the predicate, John would have written , and we should be obliged to explain. All are not of us, or none is of us. In this case there would be something predicated of the antichrists, they would be the subject in . But this is not allowable on account of the position of the words. The meaning is rather: Not all are of us, only some, although the majority are of us. But this cannot be predicated of the antichrists; for they are not all true, living church members, none of them belongs truly to the Church. But their seceding furnishes actual proof that not all Christians (baptizati, vocati) are and remain real Christians (electi, fideles). While in the seceders only are considered as the subject, the conception is enlarged in the clause , and the Apostle declares in respect of the former, that in general not all who belong outwardly to the Christian Church, are really members of the same (Dsterdieck). It is not allowable to understand with Socinus in the sense of nulli: the connection is right, the explanation is wrong. [Wordsworth: They all pretend to be of us, and the heathen confound them with us. But their secession from us, and opposition to us, clearly prove that they are not all of us. Some false teachers [or false brethren M.] there are still who propagate heresies in the Church. They are tares in the field, but as long as they are in the field, it is not easy to distinguish them from the wheat. They are not of us, but they are not manifested as such by going put from us. But the going out of those who have left us, and who resist us, is a manifest token to all men, that they and their associates are not all of us, as they profess to be, and as the heathen suppose them to be; and as even some of the brethren in the Church imagine that they are, and are therefore deceived by them. By their going out they are manifested in their true light; and by their opposition to us Truth is distinguished from Error and Error from Truth.M.].
Testimony of the gifts of believers. 1Jn 2:20-21.
1Jn 2:20. And you have ointment from the Holy One and know all things.The address has regard to the readers, to the Church, from which the antichrists have seceded. They are referred to a gift: . This gift is , unguentum, not unctio as explained by Vulgate, Augustine, Luther, de Wette, Sander, al. It is chrism. Alludit appellatio chrismatis ad antichristi nomen (Bengel). [They hare the chrism from Christ.M.]. Thus John came to use this word which besides this place occurs only in 1Jn 2:27. In obedience to the command of God kings (1Sa 10:10; 1Sa 16:13-14; Psa 45:8), priests (Exo 29:7; Exo 30:31) and. prophets (Isa 61:1) were anointed, and ointment is both figuratively, and in the ordered act itself, a symbol of the Holy Spirit. Thus Christ is anointed (Act 4:27) and that with the Holy Spirit (Act 10:38), and thus Christians also are anointed. The chrism or ointment will have to be understood as the Holy Spirit and reminds the readers of the great gift which makes them priests, kings and prophets, the , , , 1Pe 2:9; cf. Exo 19:6; Isa 43:20-21. This gift of the Holy Spirit must not be made the divinum beneficium cognoscendi ipsas res divinas, quatenus homini est opus (Socinus), or the auditio evangelii, institutio christiana (Episcopius, Rosenmller), or the docendi auctoritas (Sauler), or the true tradition concerning Christ distinguished by its being primitive, originating with the Apostles and vitally propagated (Kstlin, Lehrbegriff, p. 243), or the caritas qu diffunditur in cordibus nostris per spiritum sanctum (Didymus). And this having is a gift , they have received what they have; hence 1Jn 2:27 : . Christ is called 1Jn 3:3 and 1Jn 2:2; in Joh 6:69 He is called: , Act 3:14 : , Rev 3:7 : . The primary reference therefore seems to be to Christ who received the Spirit without measure (Joh 3:34), and baptized with the Holy Ghost (Joh 1:33) and sends Him from the Father (Joh 15:26; Act 2:33) and hence the idea is that the makes the . consequently denotes neither God the Father (Socinus, Episcopius, Rickli, Neander, Besser, al.) nor the Holy Ghost (Didymus, Grotius).It must be remembered that nothing is said here of the time when they received this gift nor of the means by which it was conveyed to them, but we read simply: . Hence there is no warrant for finding here an allusion to baptism (Augustine, Bede, Oecumenius), and the inference of the ungenuineness of the Epistle from the supposition of an allusion to a usage connected with baptism introduced at a later period, is wholly unjustifiable (Baur). [The argument for an allusion to baptism, rests on the hypothesis that this whole section is addressed to , pueruli, children, who received the gifts of the Holy Spirit in their baptism; it is then by implication extended to adults, and the use of chrism in baptism, a practice which does not belong to the Apostolical Age, seems to have been occasioned by this passage. Bengel: Eam unctionem spiritualem habent , pueruli: namque cum baptismo, quem susceperunt, conjunctum erat donum Spiritus Sancti, cujus significandi causa ex hoc loco deinceps usu receptum esse videtur, ut oleo corpora baptizatorum ungerentur.M.]. It is more allowable to connect with 1Jn 2:24 cf. 1Jn 2:18, and to refer to the preaching of the word of God (Dsterdieck). We read simply ye have! Thus John reminds his readers of an important and responsible gift from which they might derive comfort and enjoyment in opposition to the antichrists, but which they ought also to keep, use and show against these adversaries. Hence the thought is introduced by , as John is wont to do, without indicating an antithesis which is contained in the matter itself; his object being to develop his argument by way of comfort and exhortation. [It is doubtful whether there is even an adversative implication in the thought, for John surely did not want to inform his readers that because they had the they were the opposite of the antichrists. I do not mean that is not antithetical, but doubt whether is intended to mark an emphatic antithesis; in which case the Apostle would most probably have used or dispensed with the particle altogether. So Huther.M.]. There is no reason at all to discover here with Semler a captatio benevolenti, or with a Lapide an apology for the shortness of the Epistle; and still more objectionable is the view of Lange that a certain anxious care is unmistakable which puts forth even rhetorical efforts; nor is Calvin right in saying: modeste excusat apostolus, quod eos tam sollicite admonet, ne putent oblique se perstringi, quasi rudes ignarosque eorum, qu probe tenere debuerant. The further particular
And know all things denotes the immediate gain they derive from this gift. Bengel rightly explains et inde. is evidently neuter. The Syriac translates therefore falsely omnes. Although Calvin rightly says of : omnia non universaliter capi, sed ad prsentis loci circumstantiam restringi debet, we must not restrict it with Bengel to ea, qu vos scire opus est: hoc responso repellendi erant seductores. Still less must it be applied with Estius to the Church, as knowing all things, whereas individual Christians know only implicite if they hold to the Church [He says: Habetis episcopos et presbyteros, quorum cura ac studio vestr ecclesi satis instruct sunt in iis qu pertinent ad doctrin christian veritatem.M.]. The reference, according to 1Jn 2:21 and agreeably to Joh 16:13 : to cf. Joh 14:26) is rather to (so Huther and most expositors). The sentence , 1Jn 2:21 is wholly= .
1Jn 2:21. I have not written unto you, because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it. refers to the words immediately preceding 1Jn 2:19 [that is to what the Apostle had just said concerning the antichristsM.], and not to the Gospel, as Ebrard arbitrarily asserts. Not ignorance or want of knowledge on the part of the Church induced the Apostle to write this Epistle, on the contrary it was their knowledge and ability to form a right judgment of what was transpiring among them which prompted him to indite this Epistle, anxious as he was to foster and stimulate the truth possessed by his Church. Lorinus: non ut vos hc doceam, sed ut doctos confirmem. is the truth as announced by the Apostles, determining the whole walk in the light of believers (1Jn 1:8; 1Jn 2:4), begetting all love, giving life and founded on Christ (1Jn 2:23 sqq.). Whatsoever falls within the compass of this truth is the object of Christian knowledge, all this is known by believers (Dsterdieck).
And that every thing which is lie is not of the truth. is not connected with : and becauseas if indicating the motive which prompted the Apostle to write this Epistle, but the sentence depended on the second and is an object-sentence cordinated with : ye know it (the truth)and that.Thus render almost all commentators. Hence springs the question (1Jn 2:22) ; John assumes that they know who is the liar, as well as what and whence the lie is. Here denotes not only origin but also appurtenance conditioned and defined by the origin. Of course must not be explained here as a Hebraism (Grotius and al.)= , since evidently belongs to the predicate, butevery lie is not out of the truth, which, however, amounts to=no lie is out of the truth. The reference to the antichrists is plain and the sense manifest: every thing which is lie neither originates from the truth, nor can it remain with the truth; it is not matter of complaint or of surprise that the antichrists with their lies and denials are seceding. consequently is not only error, but the distinct opposite of the truth, nor is it the abstract put for the concrete, viz.: the false teachers (Lange). Our Lord Himself tells us whence the lie originates, it is from the devil (Joh 8:44). The truth is from God and full of God, and therefore incompatible with any and every lie. [Diversity of origin renders the truth and the lie incompatibles. Christ is the truth (Joh 14:6). Lorinus: Lex vero non nisi verum sequitur et verum vero consonat.M.]. All knowledge and ability to form a right judgment of moral phenomena are founded on the , the Holy Spirit, consequently on a gift, even the gift which begins with sanctifying the will and renewing the heart. Sanctification leads to illumination. This points to the powerful exhortation which accompanies the consolation.
The substance of the antichristian lie. 1Jn 2:22-23.
Ver 22. Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ?The interrogative form marks the vivacity with which John passes from the general abstract ( ) to the definite concrete ( ) as in 1Jn 5:4-5. [Huther.] There is here surely no reference to children (Ebrard). Hence Bengel rightly explains: vim habet ad abstractum 1Jn 2:21=quis est plains: vim habet ad abstractum 21=quis est illius mendacii reus? The Article is by all means to be retained (Luther translates wrongly: who is a liar? [also E. V.M.]) and to be explained as bringing out with emphatic distinctness the idea the liar i.e. he in whom the lie appears in concrete form= (Huther). It must not, however, be restricted to one individual besides whom there is none like him, but rather be taken generically or collectively with reference to the genus of antichristians, like in 1Jn 5:5 (Dsterdieck); of course concentrates in him, if we exclude lies in other spheres, e.g. those of the natural sciences, history or jurisprudence; here we have to do with the sphere of religion, with church-life. All comparative explanations dilute the conception of the Apostle; under this head we may enumerate those of Calvin (nisi hoc censeatur mendacium, aliud nullum haberi posse), Socinus (mendacium quo nihil possit esse majus), Grotius (Quis potest esse major impostor?), Episcopius (enormitas mendacii), J. Lange (mendax prcipuus et periculosior?), de Wette (who deserves more the name of liar?).Huther very justly says that Baumgarten-Crusius has altogether missed the Apostles meaning in his explanation: What is an erroneous doctrine, if not etc.In the sentence , the term is=nisi, except; , si non would be inapplicable (Winer, p. 499) cf. 1Jn 5:5; Luk 17:18; Rom 11:15, etc. The negative in the sentence: might have been omitted, since it is preceded by ; but the affirmation of the liar is fully indicated, although it is couched in the form of a negation; this is in perfect agreement with the genius of the Greek language. Similar terms are found Luk 20:27; Gal 5:17; Heb 12:19; cf. Khner, II. p. 410; Winer, p. 532 . The essential feature and the height of the lie of the antichrist is this: Jesus is not the Christ, the Saviour promised by and come from the Father, the ; this is the gnostic error which does not distinguish Jesus from Christ, but tears them asunder and thus constitutes the strongest antithesis to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The reference therefore is neither to the form of Jewish unbelief that Jesus is not omnium hominum patronus (Semler) nor to the two forms of heresy one of which denies that Jesus was the Eternal Word, and the other that the Eternal Word became flesh (Besser following Tertullian), [who says: de Prscript, c. 1John 33: Joh. in ep. eos maxime antichristos vocat, qui Christum negarent in carne venisse et qui non putarent Jesum esse Filium Dei; illud Marcion, hoc Ebion vindicavit.Wordsworth, following Irenus and Waterland, refers also to Cerinthus and his followers, who denied that Jesus was the Christ, dividing Jesus from Christ; and they denied the Son, because they did not acknowledge that Jesus was personally united with the Word, the Eternal Son of God; nor that the Word was the only begotten of the Father; and so they disowned the divine Sonship of Jesus and Christ; and thus they denied the Father and the Son.M.]. The reference is only to one lie.
This is the antichrist who denieth the Father and the Son. here and in the preceding clause, are evidently identical, and for the very reason that the liar denies Christ [or as Huther puts it: the liar, who denies the identity of Jesus and Christ, is the antichrist.M.]. John adds a new particular, exhibiting the wholly fatal consequence of that antichristian lie, (Dsterdieck) to this name in the following clause: ; here, to use the terse language of Luther, John knocks the bottom out of the barrel.The antichrist denies also the Father. First he denies Christ and then proceeds to deny that He is the Son of and with the Father until he reaches the extreme position of denying the Father Himself. The belongs to history, to the economy of salvation. The idea reaches further, even down to the innermost Being of God; the denial of the Son violates the very Being of God, consequently the Father and thus far must it come with one who denies Christ. In Jesus appeared as Christ, as the Saviour of the world, the Son of the Father full of grace and truth, the Eternal Word which is from the beginning, and in the Son is manifested the Being of the Father, His Spirit and His Love, so that the knowledge of the Father is impossible without the knowledge of the Son. Hence he who denies Christ is led to the point that he has an ideal conception of God of his own making, an , as Huther puts it, but not the true God, [Huther, to whom Braune is indebted for the thought, puts the logical sequence more lucidly than the latter; he says: He who denies the identity of Jesus and Christ, denies first the Son, for the Son is none other than (neither an Aeon called Christ who did not become man, nor Jesus who is not Christ, or according to Joh 1:14, who is not the Logos); but whoso denies the Son, denies also the Father not only in as far as Father and Son are logically convertible terms, but because the Being of the Father manifests Itself only in the Son and because all true knowledge of the Father is conditioned by the knowledge of the Son, so that the God of those who deny the Son is not the true God, but a false creation of their own thoughtsan .M.].
1Jn 2:23. Every one that denieth the Son, hath also not the Father [neither hath he the Father].Here is the progression from denying () to having (), and from the particular ( ) to the general (). evidently cannot be without an object, so that we have to connect , , but not: every one that denieth hath not the Son also (hath not) the Father; neither nor the immediately succeeding can be independent subjects, and joined to cannot be governed by as in 2Jn 1:9. signifies to disown the Eternal Word of the Father, the Logos (not only in Jesus who without the Logos is not and cannot be the Christ, but absolutely), and as such disowning implies not only mere ignorance or a limited understanding, but also infirmity and impurity of the heart and the will, it points to a separation of man from the Son of God, so that it becomes an , and contains and operates an 2Jn 1:9. It is therefore habere in agnitione et communione (Bengel), a possession in vital fellowship (Dsterdieck); habere in mente et fide, in ore et confessione (a Lapide), in faith and in love (de Wette), in knowledge, faith and confession (Lcke). False are the expositions of Socinus (non habere opinionem, quod Deus sit), Grotius (non cognoscere Deum seu qu sit ejus voluntas erga humanum genus), Episcopius and others. emphatically denotes the further loss that one cannot separate oneself from the Son without giving up the Father. The Apostle now concludes affirmatively:
He that confesseth the Son hath the Father also.On see above on 1Jn 2:9. It is an act of the inner life and of a more intimate fellowship. Cf. Mat 10:32; Rom 10:10. [Dsterdieck: In the denial of the Son is involved necessarily the denial of the Father, since the Father cannot be known without the Son, and the Father cannot be received, believed on, loved, by any man, without the Son, or otherwise than through the Son, i.e. the Son manifested in the flesh, the Christ, which is Jesus. So that in Johns development of the argument there are three essentially connected points: denial of the Christ, of the Son, of the Father. The middle link of the chain, the denial of the Son of God, shows how the denial of the Father is of necessity involved in the denial of Christ. And the cogency of this proof is made yet more stringent by another equally unavoidable process of argument. The antichristian false doctrine consists mainly in a negation, in the denial of the fundamental truth, that Jesus is the Christ. But in this is involved the denial of the Essence of the Son as well as of the Father, and again in this denial is involved the losing, the virtual not having of the Son and of the Father. In the sense of John, we may say, taking the first and last steps of his argument and leaving out the intervening ones: He who denieth that Jesus is the Christ, hath not the Father. And this necessary connection between denying and not having is perfectly clear, the moment we understand the ethical character, the living realism of Johns way of regarding the subject. As (1Jn 2:23) we cannot separate the knowledge and confession of the Christ, the Son, the Father, from the having, the real possession of, the practical fellowship with, the actual remaining in the Son and the Father, so conversely, together with the denial is necessarily given the not having: together with the loss of the truth of the knowledge, the loss of the life which consists in that knowledge (Joh 17:3). In such a connection, the confession of the truth is as essential on the one side, as the denial on the other. Each is the necessary manifestation of the belief or unbelief hidden in the heart. And this is not to be understood of the confessio cordis, vocis et operis, (Bede), but only as 1Jn 1:9, of the confession of the mouth ( , Rom 10:9, see Joh 12:42). It is parallel with 2Jn 1:7; 2Jn 1:10; and indicates the definite utterance of the doctrine which was made known by the Apostolic preaching, 1Jn 2:24.M.].
Paternal exhortation founded on promises, 1Jn 2:24-25.
1Jn 2:24. Ye, let that which ye have heard from the beginning, abide in you.The sentence is anacoluthic. It is well explained by Theophylact: . therefore must not be connected with , as if it were a mere transposition; there would be no reason whatsoever for such a connection and no reason or necessity for such an emphasis. So in 1Jn 2:27, and frequently. See Winer . . 28, 3; 64, 2. d. Khner II, 156. Hence the explanations of Bengel (antitheton, est in pronomine; ideo adhibetur trajectio), de Wette ( is really the subject of the relative sentence, placed before), and others are erroneous. Neither can be the pure Vocative (Ebrard, Paulus), nor be taken as an absolute Nominative (Myrberg).The spurious after is not improper per se (Dsterdieck in opposition to de Wette with whom Huther agrees), for it is not an antithesis of what goes before, which is also assumed by Theophylact, because the preceding sentence closes affirmatively thus: , ; and this is the ground of the present exhortation.On cf. 1Jn 2:7. John points to the apostolical announcement. is more clearly defined by it (ex quo institui cpistis in primis christian religionis rudimentis, Beza, so also Lcke and others). There is no necessity to think of the prima ecclesi nascentis tempora (Bede). The substance of , not , seems to be simple. But it is not enough to understand in general evangelium, Christi (Calvin), or the truth that Jesus is the Christ (Huther, Lcke), or (Theophylact), but we had better understand with Bengel (de patre et filio) the theologoumenon of the Father and the Son besides that fundamental truth (Dsterdieck), as indicated in the preceding verses. describes as a possession that has to be kept., The preposition must preserve its proper meaning; that which has been heard must be in dwelling within as something that determines the life (Neander). This meaning is also urged by the parallel passage Joh 15:1-10, where appears as a favourite expression of our Lord. In the sentence immediately following it is indeed impossible to render , with. The same holds good here. Hence Theophylacts , and Luthers with are false. The truth and doctrine as announced by the Apostles is really to dwell in them, as a living power in their hearts (Dsterdieck), and if that takes place, ,
If in youemphatically placed firstabides that which ye have heard from the beginning, ye also shall abide in the Son and in the Father.Bengel well observes: : vicissim. Dsterdieck hits the mark: John denotes by the position of before the promised consequence which will correspond with the indicated destination while at the same time he makes prominent the fine turn contained in the thoughtful change of and . The reciprocal effect of the Word abiding in you and of the Church abiding in Christ does not refer to the origin of the relation of the Church and of her conduct, but only to the further development of the same. But the expression and its order intimate that the word must first be brought, preached and explained, and then be heard, received and kept, and that it must have found in individual Christians an element in which it is vitally efficient, even as it is full of life, in order to enable them to have () and to live in Christ as their element. stands naturally before because the Son is the Mediator of this life-fellowship. Hence Theophylacts exposition, based on Joh 17:2; Joh 17:21 : , goes hardly far enough. The life of believers must really and essentially be rooted in God, derive nourishment, grow and mature to completeness from Him. Faith has not only brought news and intelligence and become acquainted with God, but has entered into personal intercourse with Him and carries away from Him the separate gifts, benefits and powers. The possession of this life is not left to the distant future, although the life is an eternal life, but the object of Christian hope in respect of its perfection and at the same time something present and the object of present experience; to speak with Calvin: deum se totum nobis in Christo fruendum dedit, not dabit (Dsterdieck). Besides the principal passage Joh 15:1 sqq. the following places are very similar Joh 6:56; Joh 17:23; Gal 2:20; 1Co 3:16; Eph 3:17. Hence the evaporating and diluting views of Grotius (conjunctissimi Patri et filio eritis, summo eorum favore et amicitia fruemini) Semler (sitis certi, nobis patere omnem hanc felicitatem unice veram) and others, as well as the scholastic, orthodox views of Schmid (gratiosa filii et Patris inhabitatio) and J. Lange (unio cum deo mystica, communio cum eo jam inchoata, communicatio, per quam omnes regni divini dotes homini in usum sanctum et beatum contingunt), are insignificant to bring out the mind and the thoughts of John in their living fulness.
1Jn 2:25. And this is the promise which He hath promised us, the life eternal. should be explained here as in 1Jn 2:23; 1Jn 5:11; 1Jn 5:14 where the same words occur in the same position or as in 1Jn 1:5 : ; the reference is to the words which follow . The substance or object of is qualified here by a Substantive, while the substance or object of or or or in the other passages is indicated by a clause connected with or according to the context. Instead of the Accusative (), the Nominative () ought to have been in apposition with , but it was both attracted as apposition to the relative clause annexed in the same case as . See Winer, p. 552 sq. Therefore manere in filio et patre is not the and not a pure apposition, so that the abiding itself is described as eternal life (Sander, Besser), but the life eternal is the promise (so Huther and most commentators). The is promissio, consequently not res promissa (J. Lange, Estius), as if it were true contrary to the genius and usage of Greek to add . designates Him who is the centre of this whole section [Huther), that is Christ, and neither the Father (Hunnius), nor the Father through the Son (Socinus). But , as the substance and object of the of the Son, is not viewed as a gift remote from and subsequent to this promise, but as present and experienced, acquired and enjoyed wherever the pre-requisite of the promise is complied with, namely the abiding of the word in you. Where the promise applies, it is forthwith fulfilling itself. Therefore it is not said that we should acquire the life eternal, but that at which this promise is aimed is simply mentioned and connected by attraction with . accordingly has here its ordinary force as copula, connecting this sentence with the one preceding, adding and explaining something implied, but not yet particularly mentioned in the preceding sentence; the reference is to something directly connected with abiding in God; therefore must not be taken (Oecumenius) or as designating the further consequence of holding fast the Gospel (Lcke). Dsterdieck strikingly observes: The present reality of eternal life in believers is no more annulled by the fact that it is not yet perfected in them than that inversely continued growth, a holy and fruitful development, and the final glorious perfection are excluded by its real possession.
Conclusion, with repeated warnings and exhortations 1Jn 2:26-28.
1Jn 2:26. These things I have written unto you concerning those who deceive you.Here connected with refers back to the preceding verses, and the object points back as far as 1Jn 2:18. The are the antichrists, and denotes that they are dangerous per se, really and not only unsuccessfully dangerous, as is evident from 1Jn 2:19. [It is doubtful whether the reference to 1Jn 2:19 warrants the inference of their actual success in the case of those whom the Apostle is addressing. The deceivers themselves had seceded; that is all we can gather from 1Jn 2:19, and that they were anxious to deceive others we learn from this verse, but nothing is said of their having been successful in their endeavourM.]. This is also intimated by the Accusative and 2Jn 1:8; Mat 24:5; Mat 24:11; Mat 24:24. [This is certainly a singular conclusion, for indicates that they, the readers of the Epistle, the Church, are the object of the deceivers endeavours.M.]. The word itself denotes an act, a continuing activity, and therefore more than a studium, conatus, seducere conantibus (Bengel, Huther). [See Apparat. Critic. 1Jn 2:26, note 27.M.]. Hence the reiterated exhortation to fidelity.
1Jn 2:27. And youthe ointment which ye received from Him, abideth in you, and ye have no need that any one teach you.Thought, expression and construction, as in 1Jn 2:20-21 : = . From , 1Jn 2:26, the Apostle takes , and contrasting them with , places said words emphatically in anteposition, for they would be too strongly emphasized if we were to connect them with the relative clause. cf. 1Jn 2:24. T here, as , 1Jn 2:20, is in the Accusative, but must not be connected with the relative clause, per trajectionem. The Article denotes what is known and what has already been mentioned. distinctly marks their reception and points to a greater obligation than the previous reference to possession (, 1Jn 2:20). The gift is not without its task and work, here, under the impulse of gratitude. of course designates Him round whom the Apostles thoughts revolve as round their centre, the same who is deseribed in , Christ, 1Jn 2:25. This verse proves that , 1Jn 2:20, relates to Christ. (Huther). While the Future was used in 1Jn 2:24 (), we have here the Present () in order to express the Apostles certain assurance (Huther) and to exhort at the same time to that which he does expect. Bengel (Habet hic indicativus perquam subtilem adhortationem (conferendam ad 2Ti 3:14) qua fideles, a deceptatoribus sollicitatos, ita iis respondere facit: unctio in nobis manet: non egemus doctore: illa nos verum docet: in ea doctrina permanebimus. Vide quam amna sit transitio ab hac sermocinatione ad sermonem directum versu sequentiManet in vobis: manebitis in Illo correlata)., and because the Holy Spirit is and abideth in you (Bengel: et ideo), , ye have no need whatever; thus is brought out here the , and we have here a new particular, which was not expressed in 1Jn 2:20. The construction with occurs also Joh 2:25; Joh 16:30. , Heb 5:12. The Infinitive only, Mat 3:14; Mat 14:6; 1Th 1:8; 1Th 4:9. This teaching is taken here not as a simple consequence, but as the end and aim because of the condition of the persons to be taught. Love prompts thereto, for love deems it its duty and cherishes the intention to teach. Hence the meaning is: You are not at all in the situation that somebody should or ought to teach you (Dsterdieck after Lcke and against Huther, who takes in a weakened sense and thinks that it is simply used to indicate the object). Hence we may think also of Apostolical instruction, fraternal encouragement and (with reference to 1Jn 2:21) friendly teaching, perhaps that of the Apostle himself (Bengel, de Wette, Lcke, Dsterdieck). There is no occasion here to think of ; so Semler, Spener, (=who asserts a new revelation), Sander, Gerlach, Besser. But with reference to 1Jn 2:20 and we must not restrict to instruction concerning the false teachers (as Lcke does), although that is included (Huther).It is important to bear in mind that this passage does not hold out the least encouragement, or give support, to the vagaries of fanatics, because the Holy Spirit works on the basis of the word given and received, and does not communicate any thing new, but only imparts to believers clearer perceptions and views of that which they already have.
But as the ointment of Him teacheth you concerning all things, and is true and is not lie, and as it hath taught you, so abide in Him.As we read and not , it is only necessary to observe that Bengel (idem semper, non aliud atque aliud, sed sibi constans, et idem apud sanctos omnes) finds here the unchangeableness, and Dsterdieck and others the identity of the chrism, which unceasingly teaches believers and which they have received from Him, the Christ; our reading brings out this identity and also reiterates its origin: [See Appar. Crit. 1Jn 2:27, note 29, where the other reading is advocated, according to which we render the same ointment, i.e., the identical , .M.].The structure of this sentence presents peculiar difficulties. introduces the antithesis . While, on the one hand, the Apostle had assured them that they have no need of being taught by any one, because they have the Spirit reminding them of the words of the Lord and leading them into all truth, he now declares, on the other, and by way of antithesis, that they have need of abiding faithful with Him. Hence the words in parenthesis belong to the first , although the vivacity [of the Apostles diction] which never repeats without indicating some new feature, has occasioned various modifications. The exhortation: requires fidelity toward and steadfastness with Christ, as is unmistakable from the context and 1Jn 2:28. Erasmus explaining erroneously thinks of the Holy Spirit, and Baumgarten-Crusius of the doctrine of the Spirit, while Schottgen strikingly observes: in Christo, quem Johannes semper in mente habet. The motive for abiding with Christ is: . Hence the context also recommends the well authenticated [the authorities on Braunes own showing are all the other way; they stand thus: C. Sin (?) against A. B. (?) G. K.M.]; it is the ointment of the Holy Ghost from Him [], Christ, with [?] whom they are to remain; and this ointment teaches them concerning all things, as we read 1Jn 2:20 : . But not only the extent of that concerning which they are taught of the Holy Spirit is the motive for his exhortation that they should abide with Him. The chief motive is the characteristic: . The is called absolutely , implying of course that that also which it teaches, is true; the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of truth (Joh 14:17), therefore He leadeth you also into all truth (Joh 16:13). So Dsterdieck; also Lcke, de Wette, Brckner, Ebrard. There is no ground for restricting the reference to that which the teaches, as do Oecumenius, Theophylact, Luther, Neander, Besser, Huther. The importance of the true essence and substance of the occasions the additional clause which denies all lie: , and lie is not, is not extant. John evidently here recurred to the thought expressed in 1Jn 2:21 : , and that there is no lie where the Spirit teaches. Now the Apostle resumes with the fuller form that which he had begun with , and moreover, by way of reminding them that the Holy Spirit had taught them for some time: . This Aorist after the preceding Present ought not to occasion any difficulty; and the before instead of the before is readily accounted for by the one immediately preceding it; the sentence, thus resumed, connects with the testimony of the truth of the Spirit and His teaching; agreeably to which He has taught and teaches believers. Hence we should not divide the second clause of this verse. into two parts (with Luther, Calvin, Baumgarten-Crusius, Sander, Brckner, Besser, Huther, and others), so that is the first antecedent, and its consequent, and again is the second antecedent, and its consequent. The explanation given by us is supported by Oecumenius, Theophylact, Lcke, de Wette, Neander, Dsterdieck, Ewald and others. [This applies only to the structure of the sentence, not to the exposition of the passage. As to the former we cannot but think that the one adopted by Huther and the many authorities who agree with him, is preferable to that of Braune, and on the following grounds: 1st, it assigns to its proper position, whereas in the former view is no relation whatsoever to () of the consequent; 2d, indicates that the Apostle is about to introduce an antithesis to , a sentence in which the teaching of the is to be described as exempting them from the necessity of another human teacher, and 3d, because the clause added to raises this thought above the character of a mere parenthetical and secondary observation, and stamps it as the leading thought. These are the grounds on which Luther, Calvin, Baumgarten-Crusius, Sander, Brckner, Besser, Huther, and many more, deem it preferable to divide the whole into two clauses, and to take as the consequent of the first clause. But as the anointing teaches you all things, so it is true and is no lie, etc. (Luther).M.].
The conclusion of the whole section, 1Jn 2:28.
1Jn 2:28. And now, little children, abide with [in, ] him.
connects the exhortation, repeated on account of its great importance and already expressed as a hope and in confidence 1Jn 2:27, with the preceding verses. occurs very often (Joh 17:5; Act 3:17; Act 4:29; Act 7:34; Act 10:5; Act 22:16; 2Th 2:6), or (Act 13:11; Act 20:22; Act 20:25), or (Act 16:36; Act 23:15), on the other hand (Luk 22:36), (Joh 8:40; Joh 9:41; Joh 15:22; Joh 15:24; Joh 18:36), but always so that out of the originally sentient description of the present there has sprung a certain logical significance in order to mark the consequences from a present situation, to draw an inference or conclusion, to annex the features involved in a given case or to denote an antithetical relation (Dsterdieck). Hence Paulus errs in rendering: Even already nowas in opposition to the Parthian-magian doctrine, that union with God cannot take place except in the future kingdom of light.The seasonable address frees the Apostles earnestness from all severity, and intensifies his exhortation as a paternal right, by reminding them of the fellowship of love as the consequence of his Apostolical discharge of duty. Repetitio est prcepti cum blanda appellatione, qua paternum erga eos amorem declaret (Estius). It is inconceivable how Socinus applies the not to Christ, but to Deus per Christum, and how Semler could hit upon this doctrine. Rickli, who explains 1Jn 2:27 of abiding in the confession that Jesus is the Christ, suggests here abiding in righteousness.Now follows a reference to the judgment.
That if He shall be manifested we may have confidence and not be shamed away from Him at His coming.Since and not is the true reading, we have here not an intimation of the time, or the nearness of the time, but of the reality of the manifestation of Christ (Huther, Dsterdieck). Although the same word is applied to our Lords appearing in flesh, in the form of a servant (1Jn 3:5; 1Jn 3:8. ), still it may be applied with equal propriety to the future manifestation of His glory as in Col 3:4. That will be manifested which as yet is hidden. The Apostle now passes to the first person Plural: . He ever places himself under the laws (1Jn 1:6 sqq.; 1Jn 2:2 sq.; 1Jn 3:16; 1Jn 3:18 sqq.) and promises (1Jn 3:1 sqq.; 1Jn 3:21; 1Jn 4:17; 1Jn 5:11; 1Jn 5:20), applicable to all without being able to exclude himself from the hope here presented (de Wette, Dsterdieck). Hence it is not from modesty (S. Schmid), nor because he would suffer loss if any members of his Church were falling away (Sander). is literally frankness, free-spokenness (Act 4:13; Act 4:29; Act 4:31; Act 26:26; Act 28:31; 1Th 2:2) then confident assurance with respect to all the threats and terrors of the judgment. The Vulgate translates fiducia, Luther properly freudig (vreidic i.e. free), Freudigkeit (vreidicheit i.e. freeness), which sheer ignorance has turned into joyful (freudig) and joyfulness (Freudigkeit). Compare Vilmar pastoral-theolog. Bltter 1861, Nos. 1. 2; Jtting, Biblisches Wrterbuch (1864) s. v.A Strasburg edition of 1537, indeed, has already Freudigkeit, but the original word is Freydigkeit (Nrnberg ed. 1524), Freydigkeyt (Wittenberg ed. 1525), Freidigkeit (1530), and in a sermon on Joh 4:16-21 he speaks of boldness (Trotz) in the last day. The Greek Scholiasts and Lexicographers explain the word by , , . The ordinary antithesis is (Pro 13:5; Php 1:20) to be ashamed, to shame oneself or feel ashamed, so as to depart from Him the Judge. The preposition therefore is not= (Socinus), nor=coram (Luther, Ewald), nor both together (S. Schmid, Sander), but=away from (Calvin, Beza, de Wette, Dsterdieck, Huther); but it is necessary to retain the Passive and not the Middle, because we do not retire and withdraw ourselves, but are rejected and driven away. Cf. Mat 25:41. It is impossible to agree with Erasmus, who says: ut illum non pudeat nostri. occurs only here in Johns writings, but often elsewhere (Mat 24:8; Mat 24:27; Mat 24:37; Mat 24:39; 1Co 15:23; 1Th 2:19 etc.), corresponds with , and as answers to so answers to . All this, connected with , constitutes a motive for abiding with Him, walking in the light, in fellowship with Him.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. The unmistakable reference here to the immanent Trinity is theological in the strictest sense of the word. According to the final clause of 1Jn 2:22 and 1Jn 2:23 we have here a reference to a paternal relation with respect to the Son, and to a filial relation with respect to the Father existing above and before the world within the Godhead. The Son is not only a power or principle before He became personal in the Christ, but He is personal in virtue of his Being, the Son of the Father who is a Person, the Son who as the Image of the Father is also a Person. But He became a historical Person, a Person belonging to the history of man in the Christ who did appear in Jesus. See Exegetical and Critical.
2. The knowledge of God without the knowledge of Christ is impossible, because the knowledge of God is impossible without fellowship with God, which is solely the result of confession of Jesus the Christ.
3. Fellowship with God is not the act of men but the act of God through Christ. It begins in the word which is preached and heard, continues in the communication and reception of the Chrisma, the Holy Spirit, and it consists in the truth and in the constancy of faith and confession. The Word of Christ and the Spirit given of Him must first come to us and do His work and in us and then we shall be able to abide with Him in virtue of His power.
4. The question here is as to what constitutes the difference between esse in ecclesia and esse de ecclesia. As surely as these two conditions must be distinguished from each other, so certain it is that in point of fact they do coxist alongside each other. So Confess. Aug. Art. 8.: Quid sit ecclesia?in hac vita multi hypocrit et mali admixti; Apol. IV. de ecclesia . 1John 11: malos nomine tantum in ecclesia esse, non re, bonos vero re et nomine: Hieronymus enim ait: qui ergo peccator est aliqua sorde maculatus, de ecclesia Christi non potest appellari nee Christo subjectus dici.Like tares they stood in the same field alongside the wheat (Mat 13:23 sqq.) and had part in the divine manifestations of grace whereby the whole field is made fertile and the genuine wheat brought to ripeness. But they shewed themselves to be tares and by their seceding did execute on themselves the divine judgment. Augustine and Bede, with whom Luther agrees in his second exposition, also compare the antichrists with the evil humours of the body. The body of Christ also, so long as it is undergoing the process of being cured, that is so long as it has not attained to perfect health through the resurrection, has such noxious humours (quandoquidem adhuc curatur corpus ipsius et sanitas perfecta non erit nisi in resurrectione mortuorum; sic sunt in corpore Christi, quomodo humores mali). Their expulsion liberates the body and enables it to attain unto perfect health (quando evomuntur, tunc relevatur corpus). But this does not happen to keep up Bedes figure, with the providential care of God (Dsterdieck).
5. The present section cannot be pressed into the service of predestinarianism. Augustine, indeed, says with reference to this passage (de bon. perse1Joh 2:11; Joh 2:8): non erant ex nobis, quia non erant secundum propositum vocati, non erant in Christo electi ante constitutionem mundinon erant prdestinati secundum propositum ejus, qui universa operatur. So Calvin, Inst. III. 24, 7. But although Calvin the theologian [German Dogmatiker, not=dogmatist, i.e., one who is certain or presumes to say he knows, whether he be mistaken or in the right, but the teacher of a theological dogmaM.] cannot be corrected by Calvin the interpreter, yet Augustine the theologian can be corrected by Augustine the interpreter in his Tractat. ad h. 1., where he says: De voluntate sua unusquisque aut antichristus, aut in Christo est; qui se in melius commutat, in corpore membrum est, qui autem in malitia permanet, humor malus est. The Apostle distinguishes inward and true Christian fellowship from that which is only outward and in appearance; those who belong to the former are so thoroughly fettered in their believing and regenerated mind, that, as Lcke thinks, they can nevermore separate from that fellowship. It is, to use the striking language of the Oxymoron of Didymus, a voluntaria necessitas, but no contrarietas naturarum, although in the course of moral development there should arise a diversitas substanti.The phrases and used by the Apostle to denote simply the opposite results of the ethical life-process, which in the former case leads to and in the latter to . But, as Augustine says, every Christian may become an antichrist, according as his will refuses to he determined to , which beginning with the hearing of His word and advancing to , to childlike and unremitting trust and cleaving to Him, develops itself by ever determining guiding, strengthening, purifying and confirming the will, is a veritable history of the word heard with the outward ears and inwardly in the heart filling and conquering the heart until it has become wholly believing, but for all that may and does offer resistance at every point, so that it often does resist for some length of time and so undoes all its previous acquirements, that it often conceals unpardoned sins which may again draw it down or at least arrest its progress and bring it to the point that, unless it submit to being cleansed anew, it will apostatize and thus a Christian may become an antichrist, which is however of rare occurrence, because the eternal powers of the word of Christ and His Spirit are very strong and mighty and the heart of man has been created for and with special adaptation to said powers. Hence the universal experience that it is difficult to get to Christ through self-denying and world-renouncing penitence, but that it is even more difficult to get away from Christ through the denial of the conscience and of faith as well as of the word of Christ quickened in the conscience by faith,and the Apostle speaks from this experience. But in all this there is neither predestination nor necessity, especially since the Apostles exhortation to abide leaves room for the possibility of their apostasy, as to the reality of which the Apostle confidently entertains no fear in the case of those who are vital Christians. Nor is it to be overlooked that John does not throw out the faintest allusion to the difference between the electi and vocati and the donum perseveranti. In the passage Heb 6:4-6 the lapse of the truly regenerate (as is evident from their description) is supposed to be possible, but the re-conversion of such apostates only is said to be impossible, so that we ought to be afraid. [Huther: the words , contain the idea that he who truly belongs to the Church will never leave it, but he that leaves it shows thereby that he did not truly belong to it. This confidence of the Apostle in the love of the Lord which keeps and preserves those who are His, and in the fidelity of those who have been redeemed by Him, seems to contradict the idea pre-supposed in Heb 6:4-6, that they also who were once enlightened and had tasted of the heavenly gift and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, can fall away. But John speaks here, as he does throughout his Epistle, absolutely, without any reference to the state of gradual development, from whence however it does by no means follow that he did not know it. The one circumstance that he exhorts believers, as such to abide in Christ, is sufficient to show that he does not wish to deny the possibility of their apostasy, all he is sure of, and rightly so, is this that he that does not abide, had never truly entered into fellowship with the Lord with his whole heart, but although he was touched by His love and felt somewhat of its power, he had not entirely abandoned and renounced the world.M.].
6. The Apostle here asserts a double law of historical development in its definite application to the development of the kingdom of God. Evil by a gradual process of development culminates, then in the conflict between the kingdom of God and evil, the former develops itself, and at length, through a new coming of Christ in power, the kingdom of Christ is once more subdued. (Neander). This is the one, and of the other the same author speaks thus: In this respect also we shall see how the workings of one uniform law ever appear in the course of the development of the kingdom of God, that in good and evil there are certain individual personages constituting as it were, the centre and appearing especially as representatives of the conflicting principles, uniting and concentrating in themselves as one great whole, the fragments scattered in many individuals. When in the times before the Reformation the secularized Church under the secularized papacy, was especially instrumental under the cloak of Christianity to obscure and oppose true Christianity, people might believe that they saw in this the visible manifestation of antichrist, and Matthias of Janow, the Bohemian reformer before Huss, might suppose to have detected the effect of Satans craft in the circumstance that believers instead of identifying antichrist in the present, viz., the rule of the secularized Church and the sway of a superstition even unto the idolizing of the human, were beguiled into seeking it at some distant period. The increasing revelation of the depths of evil in the world, runs therefore parallel to the development of the kingdom of God even up to its ultimate completion and both pass through personages in whom the former does concentrate. See also Dsterdieck: The development of the Christian principle and that of the antichristian principle are reciprocally related. Christian truth cannot be revealed without forthwith exciting the contradiction of the darkness. The wheat and the tares grow together until they are ripe. The antichristian spirit works already in many antichrists; but the one antichrist is still future, still to come, and is only announced by his precursors. Although therefore the last hour has already come, yet its full close is still to come, viz., the real, personal advent of the Lord which will take place immediately after the appearance of the personal antichrist. But John did neither tell us when this antichrist would come nor give us a chronological clue to the exact time of the personal advent of Christ. In both respects he confines himself to the statement that the events are to take place.
7. Athough John in giving prominence to the marrow and vitalizing centre of Christianity, viz., to the belief that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God, does not warrant us to undervalue the articulated confession of faith as a whole or as to its component parts, which are only developments of the pushing germ, he yet attaches, and for this very reason, the greatest importance to the faithfulness of abiding, the fides qui creditur, with reference to said centre.
8. His account of the and its gifts, characteristically and emphatically adverts to the universal priesthood, indicating its origin and glory.
9. The critical ability (Dsterdieck) of Christians founded on the full knowledge or the truth, like the advancing knowledge of the truth itself, goes hand in hand with progressive holiness. The point throughout is not mere knowledge, tidings or information of a life in and of (from) God, but the actual possession and enjoyment of this life, the life itself and the personal converse of the human soul, with the living and revealed God; and it concerns mans inmost and most profound being, which is neither the understanding nor the reason, but the will, and the point in question is not science but conscience.
10. It is only in the way of obedience to the word and will of God that man is able to keep and intensify fellowship with Him in order that he may become a partaker of the divine Being, the divine Nature. It is contrary to the will of God that man departs from the Being of God until he is wholly rejected.
11. The decision and the separation will not take place until the last, the last judgment; consider this.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
See what time it is in the kingdom of God? 1. Hearken to the word which is preached (1Jn 2:18; 1Jn 2:24); 2. be led by the Spirit whom thou hast received (1Jn 2:20; 1Jn 2:27); 3. take note of the separations which take place in the Church (1Jn 2:19; 1Jn 2:22); 4. hold fast to Jesus the Christ, who is the Son of the Father (1Jn 2:26; 1Jn 2:28).In all the separations in the Church be sure not to forget to decide.In every separation the sorrow of having been deceived before is connected with the joy of
greater purity hereafter.In the uncertainty as to who are true vital Christians take care lest thou lose the conviction that the vital Christian abides constant.Act as Gideon did who encountering the Midianites numbering 135,000 with an army of 32,000 at the Lords bidding reduced the same by 22,000 and made a selection of 300 from the remaining 10,000 even as directed by the Lord, and then gained a glorious victory with them (Judges 7).The source of the anointing is the Holy Ghost, its pre-requisite regeneration, its power an assured conviction of the importance of the truth, its impulse an earnest desire to bring it home to the hearts of others; it was a protection from the hierarchism and episcopalianism of the 2d and 3d centuries. Isa 41:15 applies to it. [I should rather say in more strict agreement with the text that the chrism of the Holy Ghost from Christ is a sure protection from any and every form of spiritual secessionism, separatism and individualism.M.]. Because of a sorrowful experience in the Church do not give up the joy of the glory of the Church.Comparison of the ointment as the figure or symbol of the Holy Spirit: 1, its value; 2, its use in the anointing of kings, priests and prophets; 3, its power of strengthening and stimulating the spirit of life; 4, its influence on a life well-pleasing to God; 5, its far-spreading fragrance.The fundamental doctrine of salvation is: Jesus is the Christ. 1, With it and in it we find our way into the rich heart of God and bring God into our poor heart; 2, in opposition to it we bring eternal ruin into our heart and ourselves into eternal ruin. Or, 1, By it you learn the corrupting false teachers; 2, in it the true and living Christian shows himself: 3, out of it you pass to the inheritance of God.Do not drive Christ and His word from thy heart, or Christ will drive thee from His kingdom.1Jn 2:28. Confirmation-address.
Gregory:Nisi Spiritus Sanctus intus sit qui doceat, doctoris lingua extus in vanum laborat.
Augustine:Cathedram in clo habet, qui intus docet.
Luther:It is dangerous and terrible to believe something against the uniform testimony, faith and doctrine of the universal holy Church, which has now thus held it unanimously in every place from the beginning these fifteen hundred years past.Many a man has a paternoster round his neck and a rogue in his heart.
Starke:As the betrayer of Christ was one of His most intimate Apostles, so antichrist did not arise among Jews or Turks, but in the very midst of Christendom.The Church remaineth not without offences of which that is not least that within her fold there arise men who hold false doctrine and apostatize from the known, truth; the tares do not grow by themselves, but in the midst of the wheat.Constancy in good is an infallible sign of a true Christian, just as temporizing and changeableness indicate a false heart.Christians are anointed, and their name should daily remind them of what they owe to God and their neighbour as spiritual kings, priests and prophets.A teacher ought not to despise his hearers, for they also, if they believe, are anointed with the Holy Spirit and the knowledge of divine truths, although there may be differences in the measure of their anointing.He also denies Christ the Saviour, who does not prove in deed that He is His Saviour who has indeed delivered him from the guilt and punishment of sin.We have need to be especially on our guard against the denial of Christ which takes place, not only in words and in doctrine, but also in our life.The word of God must remain in the whole man, and not only enter his understanding.A Christian, an anointed one, that is his name, but also the greatest prerogative to divine wisdom, it opens to him the school in which the most learned are seated below on the bench of humility, who follow in the simplicity of their heart, who know all things, and ever learn what they know, love and do.As is a king without a kingdom, a ruler without subjects, a general without soldiers, so is a Christian without the anointing. Because the last coming of the Lord will be terrible, we should be diligent to be so well prepared that we may be found worthy to stand before the Son of Man.The day of our Lords coming may properly be called the believers day of honour, for they shall be manifested, declared righteous, and advanced to the full enjoyment of heavenly blessing.
Spener:It is a great blessing that God does not allow the heavenly [?] deceivers to remain in the Church but overrules it that they are made known and we learn to be on our guard against them, that they must manifest themselves and make themselves known, whereby the danger is lessened and believers rendered more cautious and prompted to be diligent in prayer and to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling.Even those who truly believe and have made great advances in the faith, may be deceived, and therefore let those who think that they stand, take heed lest they fall. None but those who have the Holy Spirit and the anointing can be sufficiently on their guard against the lies of antichrist. All other knowledge is too weak by far to be able to withstand temptation and spiritual conflicts.
Uhlhorn:He only has God, who has Him as the Triune God. Let us only begin with what the Apostle puts in the middle, He that hath not the Son, neither hath he the Father, add that with which he begins, of the Son we can only know through the Holy Spirit, and conclude the statement in virtue of what the Apostle says, that the anointing cometh from Him who is holy: The Holy Ghost cometh from the Father and the Son.
Lavater:Every one who is not an evangelical Christian, does not believe in Jesus Christ, is an atheist.
Heubner:A hostile power, an opposition to Christianity, has stirred from the beginning. And this is a recommendation of Christianity; a proof of the mighty power of Christianity against evil, which is terrible to the wicked one. The more the good raises itself the more also does evil bestir itself. Where God builds a temple, Satan is sure to build a chapel by the side of it.It serves also to exercise and try the soldiers of Christ. Without an opposing power, the divine drama would be without life or interest.Unbelief which pretends that the kernel and characteristics of Christianity are irrational, is a very important epoch in this history.Who thought Christianity imperilled by the growth of antichrist would betray great weakness of heart and understanding and want of confidence. The Christian should rejoice at every further manifestation: the end is drawing nearer: the catastrophe in the kingdom of Christ is the point to which the eyes of Christians are longingly directed.The enemies of Christianity draw nourishment from the Church: it is in their interest not to suffer themselves to be deprived of the name Christian; they would then accomplish less and be less dangerous.The manifestation of all, the good as well as the bad, is the design of the Kingdom of God. The evil cannot long conceal or disguise itself or stand back: it only waits for the time of coming out. God wills it thus. The appearance of evil tries and purifies the Church. It is a refreshing relief to Christians to see the separation of the unclean.A Christian is insured and protected from false teachers. He has the Holy Spirit 1. Who interpenetrates every thing like precious perfume, enters into every thing, and imparts to it fragrance and the breath of lifeto his thinking, judging, feeling and willing. The Christian is thereby clothed with a royal and priestly dignity in the Kingdom of God (Rev 1:6). The anointing is the signature of the Christian. 2. The Spirit enables him to try, to identify the spirit of error, to judge; to such a Christian no false teacher can be dangerous.The Christian has a fine sense of discrimination (sagax odoratus); he quickly perceives the essence and tendency of every doctrine; hence his Christian severity of judgment and his antipathy to syncretism.Bad opinions, seductive principles among Christians, originate not in Christianity. The Church of Christ must not be charged with the evil that is in it.He that will not know God in Jesuswhere else will he know God?There is no revelation of God which resembles the revelation in Christ; if one is not satisfied with this revelation, which revelation will satisfy him?Whether they like or do not like it, neologians are obliged to assert that true Christianity was unknown before them; for what they now call Christianity is known to the whole antiquity.The true Christian faith is immutable and needs no perfecting.This faith is of the utmost importance; our eternal salvation depends upon it; it is not a useless, subtle question raised by the schools, but it concerns the promise of eternal life, and the virtue of this promise depends on the Person of Jesus; only if He is truly the Son of God He is able to promise and give eternal life. This must attach us strongly to the faith, and those who have felt the power of this faith, live and die for this faith.Even anointed Christians stand in need of warning and admonition, because deceivers are never quiet and because within us there is not wanting that which meets them half-way.Other gifts decrease in the course of time, the Holy Spirit does not decrease. Other frames of mind and tendencies of thought change, the Holy Spirit does not change. Yield to the promptings of the Spirit and be vigilant lest thou mistake thy own spirit for the Holy Spirit and be deceived. Be pure and meek.Abiding with Christ and in Him in steadfastness of faith and faithful following Him is the more honourable, the more fall away from Him, and it is necessary, because our acceptance depends on it. If one becomes unfaithful to Christ, how can he appear before Him with joyfulness [confidence?]? That thought has an overwhelming influence on the heart of a Christian. How shall unbelievers appear before Him who to please the world leave Christ, and esteem the worlds honours more highly than the grace of Christ? How well it would be if all men would only examine themselves in all their judging and doing; could you act thus in the presence of Jesus? would you dare to say such and such a thing in the presence of Jesus? would you dare to maintain such an opinion before Him? If you are honest and conscientious according to your interpretation, so that He may not even blame you, why have you twisted my words after your liking?
Besser:It is the last hour. But those who read the history of the Church wrongly, and consider the time of her highest inward beauty and manifest power over the world to belong to an earthly future, will be inclined to suspect the holy Apostle, to have been in error for assuring us to have experienced the beginning of the last hour; those, on the other hand, who consider that the Sun of the Gospel shone in his brightest splendor, when in the preaching of the Apostles he came forth as a bridegroom out of his chamber and rejoiced as a giant to run his race from one end of the heavens back to the same end again and that there sounds through the whole history of the Church the sigh of the saints Abide with us, Lord Jesus, for it is toward eveningaye, that even her most glorious victories, like the victory of the Reformation, are only like the reflection of the setting sun on the darkening clouds,those who see this cease to be surprised at what the Apostles tell us of the last hour and read the merciful cause of this prolonged duration of the last hour, prolonged for more than eighteen hundred years, in the words of the Apostle the Lord is long-suffering to us-ward (2Pe 3:9).We must not only be on our guard against one antichrist, one great adversary and deceiver, but against a multitudinous progeny of the antichristian seed.When somebody praised the sainted Oettinger shortly before his death, on account of his great wisdom, he replied with a smile: Yes, I have learned many things; but the most precious knowledge I learned as a child in Luthers Lesser Catechism, which comprises every thing which I desire to keep and carry away with me to the seeing face to face.A learner of the Catechism, that hath the Holy Spirit, is able so far to discover all errors which militate against the Gospel, that he is protected from deception and may immoveably stand on the foundation of his faith.Neither the Jesus of the rationalists nor the Christ of the philosophers hurts the kingdom of Satan.The antichrists showed themselves to be antitheists.Declension begins with mens loathing that which they have heard from the beginning (Rieger.)Every true doctrine the assertion of which is assigned to the church during the time of her growth, is already contained in the treasury of Holy Scripture.
Johann Tauler had preached many a learned sermon when Nicolaus of Basle, the Waldensian, visited and told him: You are a kind-hearted man and a great priest, but have not yet tasted in truth the sweetness of the Holy Spirit. From that time Tauler sought the true Teacher in the Scripture and the cross, who teaches us more in one hour than all earthly teachers can teach us to the last day.
[Warburton:The late appearance of antichrist was a doctrine so universally received in the primitive Church, that it was like a proverbial saying among them; and thence St. John takes occasion to moralize on the doctrine, and warn his followers against that spirit, which in after times was to animate the man of sin. Little children, says he, it is the last time; and as ye have heard that antichrists shall come, even now there are many antichrists: whereby ye know that it is the last time. As much as to say, we are fallen into the very dregs of time, as appears from that antichristian spirit, which now so much pollutes the Churches; for you know it is a common saying, that antichrist is to come in those wretched days. The Apostle goes on to employ the same allusion through the rest of the Epistle; 1John 5:22. 1Jn 4:3; 2Jn 1:7. Where we see the appellation antichrist is employed to signify an enemy of God and godliness in general, by the same figure of speech that Elias was designed in those times to signify a prophet, and Rachel, a daughter of Israel; and that in these times Judas is used for a traitor, and Nero for a tyrant. But as these convertible terms necessarily suppose that they originally belonged to persons of the like characters, who had them in proper, so does the name antichrist transferred by St. John to certain of his impious contemporaries, as necessarily suppose, that there was one who should arise in the latter times, to whom the title eminently belonged; as marked out in the prophecies by the proper name of antichrist.M.].
[Hurds two sermons on 1Jn 2:18, the one entitled Prophecies concerning Antichrist, the other Prejudices against the doctrine of Antichrist, are well worth reading, as they embody much of the literature on the subject.M.].
[Whitby:To deny the Father here, is not to deny Him to be the true God, as the heathens did: but 1. to deny the truth of His testimony, see 1Jn 5:10; Joh 3:33; John 2. to deny the doctrine of the Father, or that doctrine which proceedeth from Him; for He whom God hath sent, speaketh the words of God, Joh 3:34. Whence it is evident, that he who denieth the Son, cannot thus retain the true knowledge of the Father; Joh 1:18; Mat 11:27. By Him alone can we come acceptably to the Father, so as to have life; for He is the Way, and the Truth and the Life, Joh 14:6. And by Him alone are we taught how to worship the Father in spirit and in truth, Joh 4:23-24. Hence Christ so often tells the Jews, they therefore wanted the true knowledge of the Father, because they knew not Him, Joh 8:19; Joh 14:7; Joh 16:3.M.].
[Abp. Sharp:Abundance of fanaticism, enthusiasm and other mischiefs have been brought into the Church of Christ, by the misinterpreting and misapplying of those texts which speak of the gifts of the Spirit, which some men so understand as to make no distinction between the times then and the times now.(Joe 2:28; Act 2:17; Jer 31:34; 1Jn 2:27.)Hence they conclude that in these days, which are the last days, the Spirit of God is poured upon all flesh, and that every one hath a right to expect immediate impulses and revelations, as to what he is to believe and to practise: that by this assistance of the Spirit, every brother may understand the mysteries of the Holy Scriptures, without the troublesome way of studying human learning; nay and may take upon himself the pastoral office, and become a guide and teacher of others, without any warrant from human authority, merely upon the impulse of the Spirit of God. These consequences have been drawn from these and such texts of Scripture: and so far have they been promoted and improved by several amongst us, that reason and prudence and all acquired learning, are rather accounted by them hinderances to the work of Gods Church, than any ways contributing to it. Nay, they are arrived to a pitch above the Scriptures themselves, which they look upon as a dead letter in comparison of the light within them, the witness, the anointing which they have received from above, which is the only measure with them of truth and falsehood, of good and evil. The colour, which these enthusiasts derive for this their notion from the letter of some passages of the Old and New Testament, would quite vanish, if they would but take care to distinguish between the effects of the Spirit, which belonged to the converting of the world, and those which were to be His constant permanent operations among such as were already Christians. There is no one will deny but the Apostles, and those in their times, had these inspirations, these revelations they speak of: and the texts, that they produce, are some of them plain proofs that those promises were made good. They did see visions, and were endowed with extraordinary talents of wisdom and knowledge, without human methods, and might expect particular impulses of the Holy Ghost upon occasions, where they wanted either light or direction; and all this was indeed little enough for the discharge of that great work they had upon their hands, namely, the bringing of the world over from Judaism and heathenism to Christianity. But that being done once, and the Gospel of Christ, and all things pertaining to it, being plainly left in writing by the Apostles or Apostolical men, as there would be from henceforward no need of those assistances of the Spirit, so it would be a vain thing to expect them. We are not to desire those immediate revelations, nor to expect that God should vouchsafe them, if we prayed for them. God hath declared all His will, that is necessary for us to know, by our Saviour and His Apostles: and the rules which they have given us, together with our own natural light and reason, and the other outward means and helps of instruction, which are every day at hand among us, are sufficient, abundantly sufficient, to guide and direct us, both as to belief and practice, through all the cases and emergencies that can ordinarily happen to us. And in extraordinary cases God will take care, some way or other, that we shall not be at a loss. And therefore to pretend to the Spirit in these days, either for preaching, or praying, or prophesying, or denouncing Gods judgments, or for any other thing, in such a way as implies immediate inspiration; or to set up a light within us, contrary to the light of reason, or different from the light of Scripture without us, is the extreme of folly, enthusiasm and madness.M.].
[The chrism Isaiah 1. a general gift, vouchsafed to all Christians;
2. not transient but permanent;
3. leads them into all truth;
4. moves them to the practice of all the precepts of Christ;
5. assures them of their Christian privileges; (children of God, members of Christ and inheritors of the kingdom of heaven);
6. teaches them in all things; they are therefore disciples and learners all the days of their life;
7. preserves their fellowship with the Father and with the Son; (abide).
8. and makes them the Temples of God.M.].
Footnotes:
[25] [1Jn 2:18. =the last hour.M.]
[26]B. C. Sin. read after . Est lectio difficilior.
[27]B. C. Sin. omit the Article before . In Sin. it is clearly a later addition. It would hardly have been omitted, had it been originally there. [Lachm. Tisch. Buttm. reject it.M.]
[28] [German: Even now have there come into existence Lillie: even now are there many become.M.]
[29][=whence.M.]
[30] [German: that there is a last hour. Lillie: that it is the last hour.M.]
[31] [1Jn 2:19. Better to retain the Greek order with German: From us they went out., A. B. C. Lach. Tisch. Buttm. Huther, is more authentic than G. K., but less common.M.]
[32][No doubt supplied by E. V. is arbitrary and unnecessary.M.]
[33][No reason why should be rendered continued, since abode makes as good sense here as other forms of the same verb in other places. Better to render uniformly abide.M.]
[34] [German: butthat they might be made manifest, i.e. nothing is supplied, although the context requires something to be supplied. E. V. supplies they went out, Beza, following the Syriac egressi sunt ex nobis, Wakefield: this was done, Newcome, this hath come to pass, Lillie it was, etc. See below in Exeget. and Critical.M.]
[35] [German: that not all are from us better than the more inferential rendering advocated by Lillie that none of them are of us, and the less correct translation of E. V. that they were not all of us.
[36] [1Jn 2:20. German: And. There seems to be no necessity for but, although may here have slightly adversative forceM.]
[37] [German omits the Article before unction and renders and ye have unction.M.]
[38] [German omits ye; B. omits before .M.]
[39]B. Sin read instead of , August. Ut ipsi vobis manifesti sint.
[40] [1Jn 2:21. German: and that every thing which is lie is not out of the truth, but the rendering of E. V. is a happy inferential translation of the Greek idiom.M.]
[41] [1Jn 2:22. German: who is the liar. The Article is emphatic here and must be retained.M.]
[42] [German: This is the antichrist, who. has demonstrative force.M.]
[43] [1Jn 2:23. German: Every one that denieth; omnis qui, Vulg. Aug. Calv. Bengel, and every one that Greenfield, Allioli, de Wette, Lillie.M.]
[44] [German: Hath also not the Father. Better render with Rhemish and most foreign versions neither hath he the Father.M.]
[45]A. B. C. Sin. [Griesb., Scholz, Lachm., Tisch. Buttm. Wordsw. Lillie.M.] have the final clause: , and it is required by the parallel passage 2Jn 1:9 as well as by Johns fondness of antithesis. [ however should be rendered confesseth and not acknowledgeth as in E. V.M.]
[46] [1Jn 2:24. German: You, that which ye have heard from the beginning, let that abide in you. In this rendering is left out; but the emphatic you, in the sense of as for you, is decidedly in favour of the German rendering; translate, you, let that which ye have heard from the beginning, abide in you.A. B. C. Sin. Vulg. al. omit . M.]
[47] [German: If that abide in you which ye have heard from the beginning, ye also shall abide in the Son and in the Father. The three-fold rendering of in one verse: abide, remain, continue, adopted in E. V. should by all means be avoided. Lillie calls this sacrificing of the simple beauty and force of the original to a great number of good English words an unprofitable exuberance.M.]
[48] [1Jn 2:25. German: And this is the promise which He Himself; . The reference seems to be to an oral promise.M.]
[49]A. C. Sin. read . The context warrants the transition to the Plural.
[50] [German: The eternal life. The supplement in E. V. is hardly necessary, the Article is indispensable and the order life eternal seems preferable; see on the last point E. V. Mat 25:46; Joh 4:36; Joh 17:3; Rhemish version, Wakef. Macknight, Berleburg Bible, and Lillie.M.]
[51] [1Jn 2:26. , who would deceive you. The context (1Jn 2:20-21; 1Jn 2:27) shows that this is a case of the Present de conatu, i.e. an endeavour or purpose (Buttm. 137. n. 10), and so it is generally understood. Lillie.M.]
[52] [1Jn 2:27. German: And youthe ointment which ye received from Him, abideth in you.M.]
[53] is the reading of C. Sin., many versions (Syr. unctio qu est a Deo) and fathers instead of A. B. G. K. and the Greek fathers.Cod. Sin. reads really afterwards corrected into [or ]; B reads . [But both in point of authority and in point of sense to seems to be the right reading. German, following the less authentic reading, renders but as the ointment of Him; E. V. follows .M.]
[54][=and is true, better than and is truth of E. V.M.]
[55] The reading A. B. C. Sin. is on external and internal grounds preferable to [G. K. al. Tisch.M.]
[56] 1Jn 2:28. A. B. C. Sin. read instead of [G. K. Theoph. Oecum. Tisch.M.]
[57] [German: shall be manifested decidedly preferable both for the sake of uniformity and on doctrinal grounds (the agency and love of the Father in the second as well as the first coming of the Saviour Lillie) to when He shall appear E. V.M.]
[58] .B and Cod. Sin. give it as a correction of .
[59] German: and not be put to shame away from Him in His coming. Calvin: Pudefiamus ab ejus prsenti; Steph. ab eo discedamus pudefacti; Hammond: Turned with shame from Him; Green and Bloomfield: shrink from Him with shame; Peile: put to confusion of face as being cast away from Him. Wordsworth: Driven to shame from Him; Lillie: Shamed away from Him at His coming.M.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. (19) They went out from us, but they were not of us: for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. (20) But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. (21) I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth. (22) Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. (23) Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. (24) Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father. (25) And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life, (26) These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. (27) But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him. (28) And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming. (29) If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that everyone that doeth righteousness is born of him.
By the last time, whether the Apostle meant the age of the Apostles, he himself being the only survivor, or the destruction of Jerusalem, I do not determine; but that it could have no reference to the end of the world is certain, for the period in the Church which was to succeed the Apostolic age was but just begun. Heresies were to arise, according to what God the Holy Ghost had said by Paul, and the last time of the Gospel state was not to come before there had been a falling away, and the man of sin revealed. See 2Th 2:3-9 and 1Ti 4:1 . I desire the Reader to be very attentive to these scriptures. If they are taken in one mass of particulars, they evidently amount to this conclusion: God the Holy Ghost, by the ministry of John, the last then living Apostle, was summing up the canon of scripture. And God the Holy Ghost, having given every evidence and testimony by the inspired writings of his servants the Apostles, to the truth as it is in Jesus, tells the Church expressly, that heresies shall come, the chief feature of whose character would be to deny the Godhead of Christ. Heresies now at the close of John’s life, began to appear, which, under various shapes and forms, soon swarmed in the Church, that is, the nominal Church. And this John shews, is a plain testimony of being the last time.
He then draws the feature of their character. They went out from us, that is, they joined our assemblies, called themselves Christians, and, as far as outward appearances carried them, they seemed to be of the Church of Christ. But, they were not of us. Never had the tokens of regeneration, and therefore no features of the true sonship in Christ. Reader! do not overlook this. There is but one mark, and that is an infallible one of a real Christian; namely, the new-birth, or regeneration. Where this is, the proof is unquestionable of a child of God. Where this is not, the highest flaming profession is what Jude calls, clouds without water; Jud 1:12 . I beg the Reader to remark with me, the grace of the Lord, in thus giving his children the sure testimony of a believer, in being born of God.
And, let not the Reader overlook what makes everything blessed in knowledge, namely, having the unction of the Spirit, by which we know all things. This is an infallible teacher; and the figure is beautiful. The unction of the Spirit, gives light to the spiritual eyes, softens the heart, searcheth the understanding, mollifies the corrupt affections, and becometh the oil of joy and gladness, in imparting a knowledge of all things necessary to salvation.
It appears that John, the beloved Apostle, lived long enough to see many of the early heresies. And it is our mercy that he did. For, by reason of it, he hath armed the Church, under the Holy Ghost, against them. If they dared to creep in, with the denial of the Godhead of Christ, (which, for the most part, is the foundation of all other heresies,) while John was yet alive, who lay in the bosom of Christ, what might not be expected from the latter-day apostacy?
I admire the remedy which the Apostle, under God the Holy Ghost, proposeth for the stability of the faith. Abide in Him. A close adherence to Jesus becomes the sure way of comfort in the faith of Jesus. Our safety in Christ, indeed, hath nothing to make it so from any act of our’s. It is the Lord’s holding us, and not our holding him, which forms the everlasting security of the Church. Nevertheless, our confidence in Him will, more or less, bring comfort, and prevent us from being ashamed before him, at his coming. There is an abiding in Christ, which means somewhat more than our merely believing in Christ. A child of God, once savingly regenerated, may be said always to abide in Christ, though he is not always found in a lively exercise of the actings of faith upon Christ. He is still in the root, but it is winter with him, and there are no marks of life, in buddings, or blossoms, or fruit. It is plain that the Apostle meant somewhat more than merely confessing Christ, when he saith, little children abide in him, that when he shall appear ye may have confidence before him. He certainly meant to say, that by abiding in Christ, the child of God should constantly have Christ in view, be always living upon him, and living to him. He is supposed, by this abiding, to undertake nothing but in Christ’s strength, and to aim in nothing but Christ’s glory. And where this abiding in Christ is, there will be an increasing desire after him, and an increasing delight in him. So that when Christ, who is thus the life of his redeemed shall appear, we shall appear with him in glory.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
Ver. 18. Little children ] Children may easily be deceived, and made to take a sheep counter for an angel, because broader and brighter; so young Christians are soon seduced; hence they are cautioned. See Trapp on “ 1Jn 1:5 “
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
18 28 .] WARNING AGAINST ANTICHRISTS AND FALSE TEACHERS ( 1Jn 2:18-23 ): AND EXHORTATION TO ABIDE IN CHRIST ( 1Jn 2:24-28 ). The place which this portion holds will be best seen by strictly recapitulating. “God is light, and in Him is no darkness:” that (ch. 1Jn 1:5 ) is the ground-tone of this whole division of the Epistle. In ch. 1Jn 1:5 to 1Jn 2:11 , the Apostle shews, wherein the believer’s walking in light consists. At 1Jn 2:12 , his style takes at once a hortatory turn. In his addresses to the various classes of his readers, the tone of warning is slightly struck by : if indeed the whole form of assertion of an ideal state in each case do not of itself carry a delicate shade of warning. Hence the transition is easy to actual warning. And this in 1Jn 2:15-17 begins by general dehortation from the love of the world as excluding the love of God, and now proceeds by caution against those in the world who would rob them of Him by whom alone walking in the light of God is made both possible and actual to us. The note of transition from the last verses is the , here taken up by . The world is passing away: and those temptations and conflicts of which ye have heard as belonging to its last period, are now upon you: those adversaries who would endanger your abiding in Him and being found in Him at His coming.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
18 .] Children ( , as before, is addressed not to any one class, but to all the readers), it is the last time (what is exactly the Apostle’s meaning by these words? Clearly, in some sense or other , that it is the last period of the world. For we must at once repudiate such views as that of Bengel, who, strange to say, seems to understand it as “ extrema Johannis tas ,” and that of Steinhofer, who explains it to be John’s own time as the close of the Apostolic age : and even more decidedly that of c. ( , , ), Schttgen, Carpzov., Rosenm., for all other reasons, and on account of the saying 2Ti 3:1 , .
These then being cleared away, we come to the view of Grot.: “ultimum tempus, ubi ad Judos sermo est, significat tempus proximum excidio urbis ac templi et reipublic Judorum,” proceeding to interpret the to be the many false Christs who arose in that period, and to be the chief of them, Barchochebas. So Hammond, Mede, Lightfoot, Socinus: and similarly, but not so decidedly, Episcopius. But two sufficient replies may be given to this view. First, that thus these false Messiahs of the Jews must have gone forth , i. e. from the Christian Church, which they did not. Secondly, what would the approximation of the destruction of Jerusalem, viewed merely as a Jewish event (which it must be, on the hypothesis here, as would only be true as addressed to Jews), have to do with the subject of our Epistle?
And thus we have arrived at the views of those who recognize here the last age of the world, but are anxious to get rid of the idea that the Apostle, in thus speaking, regarded the coming of the Lord as near at hand, and endeavour to give some meaning to the expression which shall preclude this (to them) objectionable notion. Among these may be mentioned Calvin, and many of the elder Commentators (e. g. Aug [23] , Bed [24] , Schol. I., c., Thl.), who understand the latter dispensation : the time from Christ’s advent in the flesh to His coming to judgment. This is (Calv.) “ultimum tempus, in quo sic complentur omnia, ut nihil supersit prter ultimam Christi revelationem.” With this in the main, Beza, Wolf, Lcke, De Wette, Neander, Sander, also agree. But, apart from considerations of the unfitness of such an idea in the context, in which , 1Jn 2:8 ; 1Jn 2:17 , and our 1Jn 2:28 , shew that it is the coming of the Lord which is before the mind of the Apostle, this objection is fatal to it: that manifestly not this whole period itself, but some time within its limits is meant, from the nature of the sign given below, . . . If the whole Christian dispensation were intended by , it would not be stated as a sign of its presence, that already there were many antichrists, but rather that already He was come who is to be the final revelation of the Father. The circumstance of there being already many antichrists, corresponds with a prophecy delivered by our Lord, not of the general character of the whole of the last dispensation, but of the particular character of the time preceding , to which prophecy and to which time the Apostle here beyond question alludes.
[23] Augustine, Bp. of Hippo , 395 430
[24] Bede, the Venerable , 731; Bedegr, a Greek MS. cited by Bede, nearly identical with Cod. “E,” mentioned in this edn only when it differs from E.
Dsterdieck’s interpretation is founded in some respects on those of Socinus and Grotius, impugned above, but with this difference, that he believes the expression to refer to the destruction of Jerusalem considered not as a Jewish, but as a Christian event: as opening that period of judgment, which shall precede the end, and the length of which was no where laid down in our Lord’s prophecies, nor revealed to the Apostles. But thus, with all his anxiety to escape the ascribing to the Apostles a mistaken view as to the nearness of the Lord’s second coming, he does in fact fall unavoidably into that class of interpreters, by regarding that as left uncertain, of which the apostolic prophecies seem to speak with some certainty. And I believe that if we are to deal ingenuously both with words and with facts, we must recognize this difficulty here, as well as in such passages as 1Co 15:52 ; 2Co 5:1 ff.; 1Th 4:15 ff.; and understand the Apostle to be speaking, as any one in any subsequent age of the Church might have spoken, and as we may speak now, of his time as being the last time, seeing that the signs of the last time were rife in it. How long it may please God to prolong this , how long to permit the signs to continue which demonstrate each age of the church to have this character, is a question to which it was not given to him, and is not given to us, to reply. To him indeed many prophetic visions were given, and have been recorded for us; but what is their plain and unmistakable import, will only then be known, when it becomes necessary for the churches to see clearly the signs of His coming): and even as ye heard (in our preaching, when ye received the Gospel) that antichrist cometh ( , the present of ordained fixity: “ is to come .” But who, and what, is ? As far as the meaning of the word is concerned, it may mean, either 1) one who stands against Christ, or 2) one who stands instead of Christ. The latter meaning is strenuously maintained here by Grotius, who holds that our here has nothing to do with the of St. Paul, 2Th 2:3 ; that being “qui Deo summo se hostem profitetur,” whereas this is “qui se Christum facit:” understanding this and what follows (see above) of the prophesied of by our Lord, Mat 24:5 ; Mat 24:24 . This he defends by , meaning a viceroy , not an adversary of the king. And as Dsterd. suggests, he might have cited more instances on his side: , in Ignat. Smyrn. 10, p. 716; Eph. 21, p. 661; Polyc. 2, 6, pp. 721, 725, in the sense of : the Homeric , “equal to the gods:” , a proconsul, &c. But seeing that the other meaning, “adversarius Christi,” is also upheld by precedent, e. g. , , , in Homer also = enemy to the gods (so Chrys. on 2Th 2:4 , , . , . ), , , (the book written by Csar against Cato), &c., it is clear that we cannot solve the doubt by philology alone, but must take into account other considerations. And first among these comes the fact, that St. John, who was acquainted with the form , using as he does , ch. 1Jn 4:1 , never uses it, but always (see reff.) this word . Is it not hence probable that he intended to signify, not a false Christ, but an antichrist? Next, we may fairly allege the ancient interpretations, as shewing how Greeks themselves understood the word. In these we do not find a vestige of the meaning being attached to the term (Hippolyt. de Antichristo, 6, p. 734, Migne, , is not really to the point; it does not give a meaning to , but only alleges an undeniable feature in his character. The same may be said of Iren. Hr. v. 28. 2, p. 326, “ut sicut Christum adorent illum qui seducentur ab illo:” and of that of Hippolytus, de Christo et Antichristo, c. 49, p. 768, , and indeed of all the passages where the Greek Fathers, as Cyril, Theodoret, &c., speak of the likeness of antichrist to Christ), but every where (see e. g. the quotations in Suicer) they interpret by . The most decided is Thl., . So also the Latins: Tert [25] de prscr. hr. 4, vol. ii. p. 16, “qui antichristi, interim et semper, nisi Christi rebelles?” Aug [26] in loc., “Latine Antichristus est, contrarius Christo:” and so Bede [27] And lastly our 1Jn 2:22 is quite against Grot.’s view, where is interpreted, not , but . , which is explained, 1Jn 2:23 , to be involved in .
[25] Tertullian , 200
[26] Augustine, Bp. of Hippo , 395 430
[27] Bede, the Venerable , 731; Bedegr, a Greek MS. cited by Bede, nearly identical with Cod. “E,” mentioned in this edn only when it differs from E.
Taking then ( ) for Christ’s adversary, I would refer to the disquisition and summary of opinions in the Prolegomena to Vol. III. on 2Th 2:1 ff., where the reasons which have induced me to expect a personal Antichrist are given in full: as are also the indications furnished by prophecy, and by the history of the church and the world, as to his probable character and work), even now there have arisen many antichrists (not, “even now many have become antichrists:” this would rather be , or . . By the being thrown between the subst. and the verb, it is shewn to be only an epithet, not the subject of the proposition. But what are we to understand the Apostle as saying? Is this fact alleged as a presumption that is near , these prefiguring and heralding him, or as a proof that he is come, being in fact the aggregate of these? The question is an important one, as affecting that of a personal or collective antichrist. And the first thing to be noticed in answering it is, that these are explained by the Apostle himself, 1Jn 2:22 f., to be deniers of the Father and the Son: i. e. of the Son: and even more explicitly, ch. 1Jn 4:3 , deniers that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. Here, however, this latter point is not yet brought out: here it is as that we hear of them: as deniers of the truth, which Truth is Jesus Christ, the Son of God: as not having the Spirit, which is truth and no lie, 1Jn 2:27 . They are said to have gone forth from the Christian church, but not to have been , as their spirit , ch. 1Jn 4:3 . They are ; their spirit is , ibid., of which the readers had heard that it should come, and it was in the world already. From much of this it might at first sight appear as if these in their aggregate formed . But a nearer inspection will convince us that this cannot be so. ( ) and ( ) stand over against one another, and analogy requires that if the one be personal, the other should be also. And in ch. 1Jn 4:3 we are not told that merely the spirit is , but that it is , the personal reference being still kept. Again, we have , the present future of prophetic fixity, in both places, here and in ch. 1Jn 4:3 , set against and : and the verb itself, in its prophetic sense, one regularly used of Christ, as here of antichrist. So that our only refuge in order to consistent interpretation here, is to regard these clothed with the attributes and having the spirit of , as being his forerunners, in the sense of 2Th 2:7 , : meaning, as I have explained at length in the summary referred to above, that the antichristian principle was then, as it is now, and will be in every age, working, realizing, and concentrating itself from time to time, in evil men and evil books and evil days, but awaiting its final development and consummation in ( ) , who shall personally appear before the coming of the Lord. In St. John’s time these were to be seen in the early heretical teachers whose false and corrupting doctrine and practice was beginning to trouble the church. See again, Dsterdieck’s long and elaborate note, in which he has discussed all the difficulties of the subject. He in the main agrees with the conclusion given above; as do also De Wette, Lcke, Erdmann): from whence we know that it is the last time (these words are a formal statement of the connexion between the first and second members of the foregoing sentence, which without them it would be left for the reader to supply in his mind).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Jn 2:18-29 . A Warning against Heretical Teaching. “Little ones, it is the last hour; and, as ye heard that Antichrist is coming, even now have many antichrists arisen; whence we recognise that it is the last hour. From our company they went out, but they were not of our company; for, if they had been of our company, they would have abode in our fellowship; but the purpose of it was that it may be manifested that they all are not of our company. And ye have a chrism from the Holy One, and ye all know. I did not write to you because ye did not know the Truth, but because ye know it and because every lie is not of the Truth. Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is the Antichrist he that denieth the Father and the Son. Every one that denieth the Son neither hath he the Father; he that confesseth the Son hath the Father also. As for you, that which ye heard from the beginning, let it abide in you. If that abide in you which ye heard from the beginning, ye also in the Son and in the Father will abide. And this is the promise which He Himself promised us the Life, the Eternal Life. These things I wrote to you regarding them that would lead you astray. And as for you, the chrism which ye received from Him abideth in you, and ye have no need that any one should teach you; but, as His chrism is teaching you regarding all things, and is true and is not a lie, and even as it taught you, abide in Him. And now, little children, abide in Him, that, if He be manifested, we may have boldness and not be shamed away from Him at His advent. If ye know that He is righteous, recognise that every one also that doeth righteousness hath been begotten of Him.”
A heresy had arisen in the bosom of the Church (see Introd. pp. 156 f.). It was a fatal heresy, a denial of the possibility of the Incarnation, and therefore of the relation of fatherhood and sonship between God and man. St. John’s emphatic condemnation of it was justified, but his apprehension was groundless. He shared the prevailing expectation of the imminence of the Second Advent ( cf. 1Co 10:11 ; 1Co 15:51 ; Phi 4:5 ; 1Th 4:15 sqq. ; Heb 10:25 ; Jas 5:8 ; 1Pe 4:7 ; Rev 1:1 ; Rev 1:3 ; Rev 3:11 ; Rev 22:7 ; Rev 22:10 ; Rev 22:12 ; Rev 22:20 ), and saw in the heresy an evidence that the end was at hand. It was rather an evidence that the Gospel was winning its way. The era of simple and unquestioning faith in the apostolic testimony was past, and men were beginning to enquire and reason. A heresy has the same use in theology as a mistaken hypothesis in science: it provokes thought and leads to a deeper understanding. What seemed to the Apostle the pangs of dissolution were in reality “growing pains”.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
1Jn 2:18 . Aug.: “Pueros alloquitur, ut festinent crescere, quia novissima hora est. Proficite, currite, crescite, novissima hora est”. 1Jn 2:28 puts it beyond doubt that means “the end of the world,” and rules out various attempts which have been made to give it another reference and absolve the Apostle from the current misconception: (1) Aug. says vaguely: “the last hour is of long duration, yet it is the last” ( novissima hora diuturna est; tamen novissima est ). And Calv.: “Nothing any longer remains but that Christ should appear for the redemption of the world. He calls that ‘the last time’ in which all things are being so completed that nothing is left except the last revelation of Christ”. (2) Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. , on Joh 21:22 , compares i.e. , “the last times of the Jewish city, nation, and dispensation,” and remarks: “Gens ista vergit jam quam proxime in ruinam, cum enatus jam sit ultimus et summus apex infidelitatis, apostasi et nequiti”. (3) Beng. with unwonted ineptitude: The advanced age of St. John and his contemporaries in contrast to his “little children”. “ Ultima , non respectu omnium mundi temporum: sed in antitheto puerulorum ad patres , et ad juvenes ”. (4) Westcott: “a last hour,” i.e. , “a period of critical change”. This is possible but improbable. The omission of the def. art. in the pred. is regular. (anarthrous) is a proper name. Nowhere in N.T. but in the Johannine Epp. It may mean (1), on the analogy of , , , , “adversary of Christ,” Widerchrist (Luth.); cf. Orig. C. Cels. 6:45: , Tert. De Praescript. Hr. : “antichristi, Christi rebelles,” Aug.: “Latine Antichristus contrarius est Christo”; (2), on the analogy of , ( proconsul ), “antipope,” a “rival of Christ,” usurping His name, a ( cf. Mat 24:24 = Mar 13:22 ); cf. Aristoph. Eq. 1038 sq. : . / ; St. John seems to combine both ideas. The heresy arose in the bosom of the Church and claimed to be an enlightened Christianity; yet, while calling themselves Christians, Cerinthus and his followers were adversaries of Christ. Wetst.: “Qui se pro Christo gerit, ideoque ei contrarius est”. , the exponents and representatives of the antichristian movement were a numerous party. , “have arisen,” in contrast to the true Christ who “was in the beginning”. Cf. the contrast between the Word and the Baptist in Joh 1:1 ; Joh 1:6 .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: 1Jn 2:18-25
18Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour. 19They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us. 20But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know. 21I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it, and because no lie is of the truth. 22Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. 23Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also. 24As 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 will abide in the Son and in the Father. 25This is the promise which He Himself made to us: eternal life.
1Jn 2:18 “Children” See note at 1Jn 2:1.
“it is the last hour” Literally it is “last hour” with no article (found only here). Like “the last days,” this is one of the phrases used in the NT to describe the Second Coming of Jesus Christ (cf. Joh 6:39-40; Joh 6:44). This is an important concept in John because in our day so many interpreters have been influenced by C. H. Dodd’s “realized eschatology” (a major tenet of amillennialism). It is surely true that John uniquely and forcefully teaches that the Kingdom of God has come in Jesus. However, this text reveals that there is also a future consummation (event or period). Both are true. This is another expression of the NT tension (paradox) between “the already and the not yet” (i.e.; “is coming”) of the two Jewish ages, which are now overlapped in time.
“antichrist. . .antichrists” This descriptive phrase is both singular and plural; neither term has the article (following MSS *, B, C). Only John uses this term in the NT (cf. 1Jn 2:18; 1Jn 2:22; 1Jn 4:3; 2Jn 1:7). See fuller note in Contextual Insight to 1Jn 2:3-27, D.
“is coming” This is a present middle (deponent) indicative. In Koine Greek some forms of the Greek verb fell out of use and other forms took over their function. Deponent verbs are middle or passive voice in form, but are translated as Active voice in meaning. Here the present is used to express the certainty of a future event. The Antichrist, singular, is coming and many false teachers or false messiahs similar to him have already appeared (antichrists).
It is just theologically possible that since Satan does not know the time of Christ’s return, he has someone already prepared to step into world leadership at any moment of opportunity.
“have appeared” This is a perfect active indicative. The “anti”-Christ spirit is already present and active in this fallen world (i.e., the false teachers), yet there is still a future manifestation. Some commentators understand this to refer to the Roman Empire of John’s day, while others see it as a future world empire of the last day. In many senses, it is both! The last hour was inaugurated at the Incarnation and will last until the consummation (the Second Coming of Christ).
1Jn 2:19 “They went out from us, but they were not really of us” This is a perfect example of false teaching and false professions in the visible church (cf. Mat 7:21-23; Mat 13:1-9; Mat 13:18-30). Their lack of truth, love, and perseverance are evidences that they are not believers. Heresy always comes from within!
The author of 1 John is very careful in his choice of verb tenses. 1Jn 2:19 reflects
1. the false teachers have left (aorist)
2. they were never truly a part (imperfect)
3. if they had been a part they would not have left (a second class conditional sentence with a pluperfect verb)
See SPECIAL TOPIC: Apostasy at Joh 6:64.
“if” This is a second class conditional sentence which is called contrary to fact. It should be translated, “If they had belonged to us, which they did not, then they would have stayed with us, which they did not.”
“they would have remained with us” This is a pluperfect active indicative which speaks of completed action in past time. This is one of several references to the doctrine of Perseverance (cf. 1Jn 2:24; 1Jn 2:27-28). True faith remains and bears fruit (cf. Mat 13:1-23). See Special Topic at Joh 8:31.
1Jn 2:20 “you have an anointing from the Holy One” “You” is plural which is emphasized in the Greek text in contradistinction to those who had left the Christian fellowship. It is possible that the Gnostics were influenced by the eastern “mystery” religions and taught a special anointing which brought knowledge and identification with a deity. John asserts that it was believers, not the Gnostics, who had the anointing (special initiation) from deity.
SPECIAL TOPIC: The Holy One
“anointing” See SPECIAL TOPIC: Anointing in the Bible (BDB 603) in the Bible at Joh 11:2.
NASB”and you all know”
NKJV”and you know all things”
NRSV”and all of you have knowledge”
TEV”and so all of you know the truth”
NJB”and have all received knowledge”
This was a significant statement in light of Gnostic false teachers’ arrogant assertions about their secret knowledge. John asserts that believers have basic Christian knowledge (1Jn 2:27 and Joh 16:7-14 and Jer 31:34), not exhaustive knowledge either in religion or other realms or knowledge (cf. 1Jn 3:2). For John, the truth is both conceptual and personal, as is the anointing which can refer to the gospel or the Spirit.
There is a Greek manuscript variant in this phrase. The NKJV follows the uncial manuscripts A, C, and K, having panta, a neuter plural used as a Direct object, while NASB follows manuscripts , B, and P, having pantes, a masculine plural, which focuses on the subject “you all.” In light of the exclusivistic claims of the false teachers, the last option is best. The UBS4 gives it a “B” rating (almost certain). The anointing and knowledge are given to all believers, not a select, special, intellectual, spiritual few!
1Jn 2:21 This is one of many verses which assert that John’s readers have faith assurance of redemption and know the truth. In this verse assurance is based on an anointing from the Spirit who has given believers a hunger for and knowledge of the gospel.
1Jn 2:22 “Who is the liar” This phrase has the definite article, therefore, John is referring either to
1. a specific false teacher (possibly Cerinthus)
2. the “big lie” and denial of the gospel (cf. 1Jn 5:10)
“The liar” is parallel to “antichrist.” The spirit of the antichrist is present in every age; a basic definition (the two connotations of the preposition “anti”) is “one who denies that Jesus is the Christ” or “one who tries to replace Christ.”
“that Jesus is the Christ” The Jerome Biblical Commentary, p. 408, makes a good point,
“the author does not mean simply the fulfillment by Jesus of the OT and Jewish expectation of a messiah. ‘Christ’ here has its full sense as the preferred NT designation of Jesus, whose words and deeds have proclaimed him the divine Savior of mankind (cf. Act 2:31; Rom 1:4).”
It is possible that this doctrinal affirmation functioned
1. as a polemic against Gnosticism
2. a Palestinian creedal formula that clearly separated the Synagogue from the Church; it may reflect the post-Jamnia (A.D. 70) curse formulas of the rabbis
3. like “Jesus is Lord,” it may have been a baptismal affirmation
1Jn 2:22-23 “the one who denies the Son” Apparently the Gnostic false teachers claimed to know God, but they denied, decentralized, and depreciated the place of Jesus Christ (cf. 1Jn 4:1-6; 1Jn 5:11-12; Joh 5:23).
Based on the writings of the Gnostics from the second century A.D., the comments within the NT, and the early church fathers, the following beliefs emerge.
1. The Gnostics tried to wed Christianity to Greek philosophy (Plato) and the eastern mystery religions.
2. They taught that Jesus was divine but not human because spirit was good, but matter (flesh) was evil. Therefore, there was no possibility of a physical incarnation of deity.
3. They taught two things about salvation
a. one group asserted that a special knowledge of angelic spheres (aeon) brought a salvation of the spirit unrelated to the actions of the body on the physical plain.
b. another group accentuated physical asceticism (cf. Col 2:20-23). They asserted that a total denial of bodily wants and needs was crucial to a true salvation.
1Jn 2:23 This verse in the Textus Receptus, following the uncial manuscripts K and L, has accidently shortened the original text by omitting the second parallel reference to the Father, which is strongly supported by the Greek uncial manuscripts , A, B, and C.
“the one who confesses” This is the exact opposite of “whoever denies” in 1Jn 2:22 [twice] and 23 [once] and 26 [once]. See Special Topic: Confession at Joh 9:22-23.
“the Son” Fellowship with God is only available through faith in the Son (cf. 1Jn 5:10-13). Faith in Jesus is not an option! He is the only way to the Father (cf. Joh 5:23; Joh 14:6; Luk 10:16).
1Jn 2:24 “As for you” This shows a very emphatic contrast between John’s readers and the false teachers and their followers who left (cf. 1Jn 2:27).
“let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning” This is a present active imperative with a grammatical emphasis on “you” (which is at the beginning of Greek phrase) in contradistinction to the false teachers’ message. The gospel is personified and described as an indwelling guest. This is the first of two reasons given for the Christians’ victory over the false teachers (the liars). The second one is found in 1Jn 2:20; 1Jn 2:27, where the anointing of the Spirit is mentioned. Again, the gospel as both message and person are linked by the phrase “from the beginning” (cf. 1Jn 2:13-14; 1Jn 2:24 [twice]). God’s word is both content and personal, both written and living (cf. 1Jn 1:8; 1Jn 1:10; 1Jn 2:20; 1Jn 2:24)! See Special Topic: Abiding at 1Jn 2:10.
“If” This is a third class conditional sentence which means potential action. This continues the warning and admonition related to “abiding.” The cessation of abiding reveals that they were never a part (cf. 1Jn 2:18-19). The lifestyle evidence of “abiding” brings a faith assurance (cf. John 15). Abiding is a message heard and received and a fellowship with both the Son and the Father (cf. Joh 14:23) which is revealed in lifestyle choice, both positively (love) and negatively (rejection of the world).
1Jn 2:25 “This is the promise which He Himself made to us: eternal life” Again the pronouns in 1Jn 2:25 are very ambiguous and can refer to God the Father or God the Son. Maybe this was purposeful (as in 2 Peter 1). Apparently this statement is much like Joh 3:15-16; Joh 6:40. The believer’s hope rests in the character and promises of God (cf. Isa 45:23; Isa 55:11). Our intimate fellowship with the Triune God issues in the hope, yea, the promise of eternal life (cf. 1Jn 5:13). Eternal life has observable characteristics.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
last time = last hour. Compare Act 2:17.
have. Omit.
antichrist. Compare Joh 5:43. 2Th 2:3-9.
shall come = cometh.
are there = have arisen.
whereby = whence.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
18-28.] WARNING AGAINST ANTICHRISTS AND FALSE TEACHERS (1Jn 2:18-23): AND EXHORTATION TO ABIDE IN CHRIST (1Jn 2:24-28). The place which this portion holds will be best seen by strictly recapitulating. God is light, and in Him is no darkness: that (ch. 1Jn 1:5) is the ground-tone of this whole division of the Epistle. In ch. 1Jn 1:5 to 1Jn 2:11, the Apostle shews, wherein the believers walking in light consists. At 1Jn 2:12, his style takes at once a hortatory turn. In his addresses to the various classes of his readers, the tone of warning is slightly struck by : if indeed the whole form of assertion of an ideal state in each case do not of itself carry a delicate shade of warning. Hence the transition is easy to actual warning. And this in 1Jn 2:15-17 begins by general dehortation from the love of the world as excluding the love of God, and now proceeds by caution against those in the world who would rob them of Him by whom alone walking in the light of God is made both possible and actual to us. The note of transition from the last verses is the , here taken up by . The world is passing away: and those temptations and conflicts of which ye have heard as belonging to its last period, are now upon you: those adversaries who would endanger your abiding in Him and being found in Him at His coming.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Jn 2:18. , little children) See on 1Jn 2:12. The doctrine respecting antichrist is not beyond the capacity of a more tender age: 2Jn 1:7, note. Whence also the eleventh Catechesis, or Lecture to beginners, of Cyril treats of antichrist.-, the last) not with respect to all times of the world, but in the antithesis of children to fathers and to young men.[4]- , and even as) and it is so, even as ye have heard, namely, that antichrist comes; and, indeed, already there are many, etc. There is a similar ellipsis, 1Jn 2:27, note.-, ye have heard) ch. 1Jn 4:3.-, that) The particle is not redundant. The language is more distinct by the use of , that, appended to it.- , antichrist) The Spirit had predicted the falling away of many from the truth of Christ Jesus the Son of God; but John does not use the word antichrist in the singular number except in the 1st Epistle, 1Jn 2:18; 1Jn 2:22, 1Jn 4:3, in the 2d Epistle 1Jn 2:7 : he does not introduce it at all in the 3d Epistle, in his Gospel, or in the Apocalypse; nor does any other writer of the New Testament use it. Whether the phraseology of the apostles or the language of the faithful led to the introduction of that word, John, about to cut off [guard against] the errors which might arise, wishes mention to be made not only of antichrist, but also of antichrists: and when he speaks of antichrist, or the spirit of antichrist, or a deceiver and antichrist, though he speaks in the singular number, he designs to point out all who are deceivers and enemies of the truth. The faithful had heard that the spirit of antichrist, and antichrist himself, should come. John acknowledges that, and adds, that the spirit of antichrist is now already in the world, that now there had arisen many antichrists. And as Christ is sometimes spoken of for Christianity, so antichrist is spoken of for antichristianity, or the doctrine and multitude of men opposed to Christ. There is in particular one remarkable adversary, who is called the Horn speaking great things, Dan 7:8; Dan 7:20; the man of sin, etc., 2Th 2:3-4; a beast ascending out of the bottomless pit, Rev 11:7; Rev 17:8; but he indeed appears to be called by the same name of antichrist, rather in accordance with ecclesiastical usage, ancient and modern, than in accordance with the sense of the apostle. Comp. H. Mores Synopsis of Prophecy, Book 1st, Ch. i. 4. John so admits that antichrist even then was come, as to teach, that not one only, but many antichrists had come; a matter which he considers of greater consequence and more disastrous. The whole class of those, who have any good or evil disposition, is often expressed in the singular number with the article. , the good man [every man that is good], etc. Mat 12:35; Mat 18:17; 1Pe 4:18; Tit 2:8; Joh 10:10; Joh 10:12; and so everywhere, especially in Proverbs, also 1Jn 4:2-3; 1Jn 4:6. Thus , , , the liar, the deceiver, antichrist, ch. 1Jn 2:22; 2Jn 1:7. Therefore antichrist, or antichristianity, has propagated itself from the close of Johns life through the whole course of ages, and still remains until that great adversary arises.-) comes, from another place. The antithesis is, Many antichrists have arisen, viz. from us, 1Jn 2:19. Comp. Act 20:29-30.- ) , and: , Lat. hodie, to-day, Germ, wrklich, actually. This is opposed to mere previous hearing [of antichrists].–, whence-it is) Hence the necessity of the admonition follows.
[4] There were three hours or seasons in all, of which the one both began after the other, and conjointly with continuous career inclined towards the end. The hour of the fathers and also of the youths was immediately completed. Hence it is to the little children that John says, It is the last hour. In this the last hour we all even still live.-V. g.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Jn 2:18-29
WARNINGS CONCERNING ANTICHRISTS
(1Jn 2:18-29)
18 Little children, it is the last hour:–Again we meet with the designation, “little children” (paidia), as in 2:1, 12, 13 ; and the meaning here, as in 2:1, is obviously, the entire body of disciples addressed by the apostles. For the reasons why a more limited significance is to be assigned to the expression in 2:12, 13, see the notes there.
The words “It is the last hour” are to be closely construed with the verses which immediately precede them. The apostle had described the transient nature of the worldly sphere and had pointed out that only those who do the will of the Father shall abide unto the ages. Here, he continues his exhortation by sol-emnly directing attention to the fact that his readers were even then in the period of “the last hour,” and that events known to foretoken it were already appearing.
What is the last hour here referred to? The termination of the Jewish state, so many think; the last hour of the world before the consummation of all things, so others. Both views are erro-neus. The Jewish state had already ended when the Epistle was written, and thus could not have been the “hour” to which the apostle alluded. And, to understand John as affirming that the last hour of the world was imminent in his day is to ascribe to him a position which the passing of the centuries has proved to be un-true. The first view is thus historically incorrect; the second impeaches the inspiration of the writer; and we hence reject both.
Three Greek words are variously used in the New Testament to indicate time, as such. Chronos is time with reference to dura-tion or succession; kairos is time contemplated with reference to events; and hora is time with reference to a fixed date or period. It is the last of these words–hors–which occurs in the text, and the meaning is, therefore, a fixed date or period. The word is of obvious figurative significance, and thus describes a determinate period fixed in the divine mind and the last of the events thus predetermined by the Father. The word designates time, time conceived of as a definite period, this period being the last in the succession of periods similarly determined by deity. It therefore designates the Christian dispensation, the last of the great periods or ages arranged by the Father. (Isa 2:2-4; Act 2:17; Heb. :2.)
And as ye heard that antichrist cometh,–The apostle’s readers were already in possession of information regarding “anti-christ”; they had heard it through the preaching of the writer and others. Those who had been their teachers, among them John himself, had earlier warned of the appearance of this antichrist.
Who, or What, is “antichrist?” The word itself suggests two possible meanings, accordingly as the preposition “anti” used in composition here, is understood to signify (a) over against, or (b) opposed to. If the former, the word denotes one who puts him-self in the place of Christ; if the latter, one who stands in opposi-tion to Christ. The word appears only in the writings of John; here, and in 2:22; 4:3; and 2Jn 1:7. His characteristics, as indicated in those verses, are, (1) he is a liar; (2) a deceiver; (3) a denier that Jesus is the Christ; and (4) he refuses to acknowl-edge that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh.
References to a similar individual, in the language of the Lord, and the writings of Paul, enable us to fix his identity more defi-nitely, and indicate that the word combines the two meanings suggested above, viz., one who not only opposes Christ, but who usurps the place of Christ. “For many shall come in my name, saying, I am the Christ; and shall lead many astray.” “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.” (Mat 24:5; Mat 24:24.) “Let no man beguile you in any wise; for it will not be, except the falling away come first and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition, he that opposeth and exalteth himself against all that is called God or that is worshipped; so that he sitteth in the temple of God setting himself forth as God.” (2Th 2:3-4.) The individual here described is designated as “the man of sin,” and the “son of perdition.” (a) He opposes his will to that of God; (b) he exalts himself against God; (c) he sits in the temple of God; and (d) he sets himself forth as God. He is, moreover, (1) the personification of sin; (2) the son of perdition; (3) a participant in signs and lying wonders, the pur-pose of which is (4) to deceive. Like the antichrist described by John, and the false Christs predicted by the Lord, he seeks to identify himself with deity; he, like them, seeks to deceive, and has arrayed himself against the Lord and his Christ, and opposes them. To the candid mind the conclusion is irresistible that the “man of sin,” whom Paul describes, is identical with the “anti-christ,” to which John refers. And, in the centuries which have passed since these words were penned, no character in history so nearly conforms in minute detail to the representation here given as the pope of Rome!
To deny that these prophecies find fulfillment in him is to close one’s eyes to the facts in the case, utterly to ignore the evidence which obtains, and to reduce Biblical exegesis to mere caprice.
Even now have there arisen many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last hour.–If it be asked why John added that already there had arisen many antichrists (long before the development of the apostasy and the appearance of the first pope), the answer is obvious: while the great antichrist predicted by John and described by Paul had not come, many were evidencing and exhibiting the same spirit as would be haracteristic of him, and were, therefore, properly styled antichrists. We, today, refer to men as papists who evince the spirit of and support the papacy ; and with equal propriety those of John’s day who preceded the popes but possessed his spirit were similarly designated. False and heretical teachers were then active, some of whom denied the deity of Jesus, and others his humanity, men who were clothed in the attributes of and possessed the spirit of the antichrist to come. If it be insisted that the pope does not today deny the Christ or oppose him but, on the contrary, supports his cause and defends his name, we deny it. As the so-called vicar of Christ, he affects to be the Lord’s personal representative on earth; he blasphemously claims the prerogative of Christ in forgiving sins; and he alleges that he sits in the seat of Christ on earth. He is, therefore, a parody of the Christ, a counterfeit Christ; and though he imitates some of the characteristics of Christ, this is precisely what is ex-pected of one who seeks to deceive.
The appearance of these antichrists was evidence that the “last hour” had been ushered in, such being tokens predicted by Christ to appear before the consummation of the age. (Mat 24:5; Mat 24:24-27.)
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 made manifest that they are not of us.–The antecedent of “they” is the word “antichrists,” of the preceding verse. The preposition ek, rendered “out from,” indicates origin from the center; and these were, therefore, for-merly among the disciples, and members of the church. They became apostates from the fold by going out. They were not “of” the disciples, i.e., they did not possess the same spirit of obedience characteristic of the disciples, for if they had “they would have continued with” the disciples. In going out, i.e., in apostatizing from the faith, they were “made manifest” (shown to be), not of the disciples, and for the reason assigned above.
This passage, often cited by advocates of the doctrine of the impossibility of apostasy for the purpose of showing that those who abandon the cause are mere professors or pretenders, and were never sincere, falls far short of the effort; for (a) they were once with the disciples; (b) they went out from them; (c) one does not go out from a place where he has never been; (d) had they possessed the same love for the Lord and equal desire to serve him as those from whom they went out, they would have continued with them; (e) they did, in fact, continue for a time, and then ceased to be faithful. (f) It follows, therefore, that they simply apostatized from the right way. We learn from this that (1) there was no necessity from without which made it impossible for these people to forsake the right way; (2) they were under no compulsion such as would have been true if the doctrine of decrees and predestination, as taught by Calvinists, is true. (3) Some obey the gospel and, like him of whom the Saviour spoke in the parable of the soils, “heareth the word, and straightway with joy receiveth it; yet hath he not root in himself, but endureth for a while; when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, straightway he stumbleth.” (Mat 13:20-21.) Others, like those of this text, adopt false and heretical doctrines, forsake the church, and make shipwreck concerning the faith. (1Ti 1:19.)
20 And ye have an anointing from the Holy One, and ye know all things.–This passage asserts that these to whom John wrote: (1) had an anointing; (2) this anointing they re-ceived from “the Holy One,” Christ; (3) as a result of this anoint-ing they knew all things.
The word “anointing” is translated from the Greek chrisma, a term originally signifying an oil or ointment rubbed on the skin, and later, the anointing itself. There is a play on words in the Greek Testament here, not observable in the translation. If the false teachers were anti-christoi, these to whom John wrote were christoi, anointed ones. The reference here is to a custom charac-teristic of the law of Moses of anointing with perfumed oils those elevated to positions of trust or power. In compliance with the will of Jehovah, kings (1Sa 10:10), priests (Exo 29:7), and prophets (Isa 61:1) were anointed; and ointment is both figura-tively, and in the act itself, a symbol of the Holy Spirit. Jesus was the anointed one (Act 4:27), and that with which he was anointed was the Holy Spirit (Act 10:38).
Some hold to the view that the anointing alluded to by John was the “ordinary measure” of the Spirit, believed by them to be vouchsafed to all believers. References cited in support of this view are Gal 4:6; Eph 3:16; Php 1:19; and 2Co 3:17 ff. This conclusion is based on an unwarrantable assumption. It should be noted that the test makes no mention whatsoever of the time when, nor the manner in which the anointing was received It merely affirms the fact of its occurrence, and not the manner or mode thereof. To affirm that this is the “ordinary measure of the Spirit which all Christians receive in conversion” is to inject a meaning into the passage, rather than to draw out the meaning that is there.
This was not an “ordinary measure” of the Spirit, and for the following reasons: (1) The context is against this view. Antichrists, formerly among the disciples, and now apostates, were advocating false and heretical doctrines designed to lead the disciples astray. These teachers were readily recognizable because the faithful had received an anointing from the Lord. In this anointing these saints had been supplied with an endowment en-abling them to discern false spirits, and their teaching–to detect those who falsely asserted their inspiration: “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but prove the spirits, whether they are of God; be-cause many false prophets are gone out into the world.” (1Jn 4:1.) This test they were able to make by comparing the teach-ing of the Spirit within them with the pretensions of those teachers who affected to be similarly led. (2) This anointing which they had received enabled them to know “all things.” This phrase, “all things,” is, of course, to be interpreted in the light of the context, and with reference to matters there considered. It was not the apostle’s purpose to imply that such anointing made those who received it omniscient; otherwise, why was he, an inspired apostle, writing to them at all? If, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they had come into possession of all knowledge, why this Epistle to them? The “all things” must, therefore, be limited to include the things pertaining to the antichrists. (3) The anoint-ing supplied them with such information as they needed to recog-nize and refute the false teachers who had gone out from among them. So, the apostle later affirmed: “These things have I written unto you concerning them that would lead you astray. As for you, the anointing which ye received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any one teach you; but as his anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is no lie, and even as it taught you, ye abide in him.” (1 John 4:26, 27.)
We conclude, therefore, that the “anointing” which these to whom John particularly wrote had received a miraculous measure of the Spirit; that this measure enabled them to recognize and refute the false teachers which plagued the church at that time; and that the anointing is not to be confused with any so-called “ordinary measure” of the Spirit available to Christians today In the absence of a written revelation, it was needful that an in-fallible test be supplied the early saints by means of which they were able to discern and to expose the pretensions of those who sought to lead them astray. Such was the purpose of the “anoint-ing” here contemplated. See further on this in the comments on 1Jn 2:27.
21 I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and because no lie is of the truth.–Here, again, the reference is to the immediate context, and to the matters which had claimed the apostle’s attention above. Certainly he is not to be understood as affirming that the reason he wrote the truth to them was because they already possessed all the truth which he wrote. If they already had it, why did he write? The “truth” which they possessed was with reference to the false teachers about them; the manner in which they received this truth was through inspiration, styled in the verse preceding, “an anointing,” a miraculous gift enabling them to discern false and lying spirits. The “lie” which is opposed to the truth was that which the antichrists taught. (Verse 18.)
22 Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ–The “lie” had claimed the apostle’s attention in verse 21; here, the one who originated it. Passing from the abstract to the concrete, John identified the liar as “he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ.” Many false theories regarding the nature and the attributes of the Saviour were afloat when John wrote this Epis-tle. The Gnostics alleged that Jesus and Christ were two different persons; that Christ merely appeared to have flesh, but in reality did not; and that the one designated as Jesus was without divine origin. The effect of this heresy was, in the case of Christ, to deny his humanity; and in the case of Jesus, to deny his deity. (See under “Design of the Epistle,” in the Introduction.)
This is the antichrist, even he that denieth the Father and the Son.–Here, the word “antichrist” is used in the same sense as in its second occurrence in verse 18, to identify those who possessed the character and attributes of the great antichrist to come. He who taught the things attributed to him here was of the same purpose and spirit as antichrist, and thus might properly bear his designation. To deny the humanity and deity of Jesus was to repudiate his Messiahship; and to reject the Messiahship was, in effect, to reject the Father himself. “He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father that sent him.” (John 5 23.) The Son reveals the Father (Joh 1:18; Joh 14:9), and our only approach to the Father is through the Son (Joh 14:6). Thus to reject the Son is to repudiate the only method by which it is possible to reach the Father. This is the reason why an acknowledgement of the Son before men is a prerequisite to ac-knowledgement by the Father: “And I say unto you, Every one who shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God: but he that denieth me in the presence of men shall be denied in the presence of the angels of God.” (Luk 12:8. Cf. Mat 10:32.)
23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same bath not the Father: he that confesseth the Son hath the Father also.–A conclusion drawn from preceding premises. He who disowns the Son, in the same act rejects the one who is his Father. Inasmuch as it is not possible to know the Father but by the Son, such rejection must inevitably extend to the Father also. This truth is stated both negatively and positively in this verse. It emphasizes what is often taught in the sacred writings that no man can have a clear knowledge of God the Father who does not learn of and familiarize himself with the attributes and characteristics of the Son. “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him,” i.e., revealed him, made him known. (Joh 1:18.) Since the appearance of the Son no one can truthfully object to the accept-ance of deity on the ground that such is unknowable. The Father has revealed himself to man through his Son.
While these words were primarily written to refute the ancient Gnostics who plagued the church with these heresies at the time John wrote, they are not without a very definite and pertinent relevancy in our time. The seeds of the ancient Cerenthian heresy is to be seen in the modern rationalism which affects to believe in God but which rejects Christ as his Son and the Scriptures as a revelation from him. God, without Christ, is simply not! Such a being is utterly without existence. The attempt to visualize God, without Christ, is to reduce him to a metaphysical abstraction, eventuating in pantheism, or atheism. Voltaire, the famous French infidel, entranced by the unspeakable beauty in the Swiss Alps, shouted, “God the Father! I adore thee,” and then, as if ashamed of his outburst, immediately added that he did not worship the Son, an illustration of the conclusion which the apostle draws that it is impossible to acknowledge the Father without confessing the Son also.
It will of course be unnecessary to add, to the thoughtful reader, that to confess the Son is much more than merely saying that one believes that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. The Lord himself said, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy by thy name, and by thy name cast out demons, and by thy name do many mighty works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” (Mat 7:21-23.) Here, as in 1Jn 4:2, to confess the Son is to acknowledge him for what he is, and to render to him the obedience such an acknowledgement implies. The apostle had earlier shown that the Gnostics, in denying that Jesus is the Christ, had, in so doing, repudiated the Father. Conversely, those who confess the Son, by implication, also acknowl-edge the Father.
24 As for you, let that abide in you which ye heard from the beginning.–That which they had heard from the begin-ning was the truth; the beginning was their earliest acquaintance with the gospel; and the manner in which it was brought to them was by means of preaching. This which they had thus heard they were to allow to abide in them, literally, to let it settle down and find, as it were, its permanent home in them. The exhortation is, therefore, one to steadfastness, an admonition to hold fast to that which had been taught them.
If that which ye heard from the beginning abide in you, ye also shall abide in the Son, and in the Father.–Here, as in the clause immediately preceding, the word “abide” (meno) means to settle down and dwell, as in one’s permanent home; if the truth is thus permitted to settle down in us, we shall, in turn, be privi-leged to settle down, and have our home in the Son and in the Father. The conditional particle “if” governs the sentence and determines the conclusion. If, i.e., on condition “that which ye heard from the beginning abide in you, ye also shall abide in the Son and in the Father.” Here is another of the many passages in the scripture clearly establishing the conditionality of salvation and emphasizing the necessity of continued faithfulness. See this same truth taught Joh 6:56; Joh 15:1 ff; Joh 17:23; Eph 3:17; 1Co 3:16; 1Co 6:17.
25 And this is the promise which he promised us, even the life eternal.–From this verse ye learn, (1) eternal life is a promise; (2) this promise is conditioned on our holding fast to that which he heard from the beginning. It follows, therefore, that eternal life is not a present possession, but a promise, a promise conditional and dependent on our remaining faithful. Passages, such as Joh 5:24, apparently asserting that the believer is in possession of eternal life already must be understood as declaring that it is had in prospect only.. “In hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before times eternal.” (Tit 1:2.) One does not hope for that which he already has. (Rom 8:24-25.) “Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that bath left house, or brethren, or sister, or mother, or father, or children, or lands, for my sake, and for the gospel’s sake, but he shall receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses, and breth-ren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with per-secutions; and in the world to come eternal life.” (Mar 10:29-30.) The Lord often promised eternal life to those who abide faithful: “Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that the Son may glorify thee: even as thou gayest him authority over all flesh, that to all whom thou hast given him, he should give eternal life. And this is life eternal that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, even Jesus Christ.” (Joh 17:1-3.)
26 These things have I written unto you concerning them that would lead you astray.–Those seeking to lead John’s readers astray were the “antichrists” (verse 18), false and heret-ical teachers of that period who were exceedingly active in their efforts to lead the faithful away from the true faith. In view of this constant and persistent threat to the security and well-being of the saints, it was especially needful that John should pen these words of warning. False teachers early appeared in the apostolic church, and many warnings regarding them were given. To the elders of the church in Ephesus, Paul said: “I know that after my departing grievous wolves shall enter in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. (Act 20:29.) And to Timothy, the same apostle wrote, “But the Spirit saith expressly, that in later times some shall fall away from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons, through the hypocrisy of men that speak lies, branded in their own conscience as with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and com-manding to abstain from meats, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by them that believe and know the truth.” (1Ti 4:1-3.) And John, himself, to put his readers constantly on guard against false teachers affecting to be led by the Spirit, wrote, “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but prove the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” (1Jn 4:1.)
27 And as for you, the anointing which ye received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any one teach you; but as his anointing teacheth you concerning all things, and is true, and is no lie, and even as it taught you, ye abide in him.–The meaning of this verse is identical with that of verse 24, except that what is set forth there as a command is stated here as a fact. Two things essential to the proper understanding of this must be noted (1) When the apostle said, “Ye need not that any one teach you.” He is to be understood as having reference to the matters of the context, and including the things but recently under consideration, viz., the ability to discern between false and true teaching. (2) The ones who had no need of teaching were those who had been anointed, i.e., had received a miraculous measure of the Spirit, thus enabling them to exercise discernment essential in such instances. This gift, the discernment of spirits, as in the case of all the spiritual endowments of the apostolic age, was not a universal gift; and those who exercised it did so because they were specially endowed by the Holy Spirit for such a purpose. The ones exercising this gift were those referred to in verse 24, and not the entire body of believers. (Cf. 1Co 12:10.)
It is an unwarranted extension of the apostle’s remarks here, to apply them to all believers; to urge that one does not need to be taught the truth of the gospel today because he is already in possession of it; or to conclude that the “anointing” here contem-plated is the “ordinary measure” of the Holy Spirit, which all children of God, by virtue of their sonship, receive. (Gal 4:6-7.) See the comments on verse 24, above.
The meaning is that those thus endowed were able to weigh the claims of the teachers about them; they were in possession of the means with which to apply an infallible test thereto; and they could, therefore, know whether such men spoke for God or not. There is no support here whatsoever for the theory that all Chris-tians have the anointing of the Holy Spirit or that the inspiration of the Holy Spirit extends to all believers today; or that men are justified in setting aside the revealed and written word of God to follow the leading of the so-called revelations with which they affect to be endowed. Such a theory is a hurtful and dangerous one, and is responsible for the extreme and ridiculous fanaticism prevalent among those who profess to be thus anointed.
This gift of discernment respecting the false doctrines then being propagated remained with those selected to exercise such at the time John wrote; the ability to judge of the claims of the teachers of such doctrines was not a passing thing, being necessary until the complete deposit of truth had been permanently embedded in a written record; and the anointing thus received rendered further apostolic teaching, with reference to this particular mat-ter, unnecessary. Here, again, is evidence of the correctness of our exposition that this information thus vouchsafed was lim-ited to the matters embraced “in all things” pertaining to the false teachers under consideration. If all the disciples were em-braced in these remarks; if all received the anointing of the Holy Spirit; if all possessed a knowledge of “all things”; and if none of them needed that any one should teach them, why the Epistle itself? On the assumption that the gift of the Spirit here contem-plated extended to include all believers, the Epistle itself is ren-dered superfluous, John’s effort unnecessary, and indeed, the Bible itself a useless book! The conclusion is, therefore, irresistible, that the “anointing” was a miraculous gift; it was of limited duration; and it was, along with all the gifts of a miraculous nature, removed when the church reached maturity. “Love never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall be done away ; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall be done away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done away. When I was a child, I spake as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child; now that I am become a man, I have put away childish things.” (1Co 13:8-11; cf. Eph 4:11-13.)
The leading of the Spirit, received in the miraculous gift referred to as the “anointing,” was true, it was no lie and it might, therefore, be safely depended on to guide in the right way. So long as those endowed therewith followed the direction of the gift which they possessed, they were able to “abide” in him –Christ. The mere possession of spiritual gifts did not guarantee to the possessor thereof the impossibility of apostasy.
It is well to remember that the direction of the Spirit in mirac-ulous fashion was never designed to supplant the written word; it was, on the contrary, merely a temporary device, to supply the early church with the means of discerning false teaching until such time as the record was completed. The New Testament is the complete and final deposit of truth in this age, and an allegation of additional information from the Lord must be, regardless of its source, repudiated. (See comments of verse 20, above.)
28 And now, my little children, abide in him that, if he shall be manifested, we may have boldness, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.–Here is the tender ad-dress of 2:1, and the admonition and exhortation of 2:24, 27, repeated. It is an address of age to youth, an admonition essential to their continued well-being. The manifestation of Christ, and his coming is, of course, the same event. The conditional phrase, “if he shall be manifested,” indicates John’s uncertainty as to the time of the event, thus confirming the teaching of Christ with reference to the matter. (Mar 13:32.) The exhortation which this verse contains is grounded in the desire of the apostle that when such an event does occur both he and his readers might (a) have boldness, and (b) not be ashamed before the Lord.
The word “boldness” (parresia), as here used, signifies “free-dom of speech; ” the right to speak out as one thinks, and was used by the ancient Greeks of their privilege as free citizens. It was the apostle’s hope that all those to whom he wrote as well as himself might live in such fashion as to be able to stand unafraid in the presence of the Lord, and to be free to express their confi-dence in their position. “Ashamed,” from aischunomai, “to grow pale, to change color from shame,” is used to indicate the effect which the coming of Christ will produce on those who are unpre-pared to meet him. Those who are ashamed will, in that day, shrink from the Lord in guilty fashion, fully aware of the fact that they are unprepared to meet him. Cf. 2Th 1:7-9.
29 If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one also that doeth righteousness is begotten of him.–At first glance it would appear that the antecedent of the pronoun “he” of the first clause refers to Christ; but, in view of the fact that “of him,” in the last clause must be referred to the Father, the refer-ence must be to the Father here. It is, therefore, God who is “righteous”; it is “of God” that every one that “doeth righteous-ness” is begotten. One is never, in the scriptures, said to be born or begotten of Christ, but always of God. (1Jn 3:9; 1Jn 3:18; 1Jn 4:7.)
The word “know” of the first clause is from the Greek oida, to know theoretically; the second is from ginosko, to know experi-mentally. The meaning is, if you know (i.e., recognize theoretically) that God is righteous, you have practical knowledge that he who does righteousness is begotten of God. If one intuitively recognizes God as possessed of such principles, reason suggests that whoever habitually does righteousness (ho poion, present linear action) as a mode of life is begotten of God. This inference the members of the apostle’s proposition makes clear: (1) God is righteous. (2) As such, he is the source of righteousness. (3) When, therefore, one exhibits righteousness as a manner or mode of life, it follows that God is the source thereof. (4) Those who exhibit God’s nature must receive it through regeneration. Hence, (5) “Every one also that doeth righteousness is begotten of him.” Righteousness is right-doing, moral rectitude in all of the relationships of man, and obedience to the commandments of God. (Psa 119:172.)
Though the doctrine is clearly and positively taught elsewhere (e.g., Mat 7:21; Mar 16:15-16; Rev 22:13-14), this pas-sage cannot be properly cited in support of the view that doing righteousness, i.e., keeping the commandments, is a condition pre-cedent to salvation from past, or alien, sins. (1) The righteous-ness here contemplated is that which one does as a child of God, and not in order to become one. (2) The logical order of the premises leading to the conclusion of the apostle shows that it was his design to exhibit the fact that “doing righteousness” is evidence that one is a child of God, and is not offered as a condition on which one becomes a child. Nor is there any significance in the fact that gennao is rendered “begotten.” rather than “born.” Here the word is descriptive of the new birth, but is properly rendered “begotten,” (a) because it is incongruous and awkward to predicate birth of a masculine personality; and (b) the scriptures, properly translated, never refer to a birth of God!
Commentary on 1Jn 2:16-29 by E.M. Zerr
1Jn 2:18. Little children is used in the sense that is explained at the first verse of the chapter. Last time could have a number of definitions on account of the second word, hence the thought must be gathered from the use that is made of it. The doctrine of Christ is not directly taught in the Old Testament while He is the central figure in the New. The verse speaks of antichrists (which means against Christ) so we understand John means we are living in the last Dispensation. Such is a logical conclusion because the basis of the whole system is belief in Christ (not Moses).
1Jn 2:19. Went out from us signifies the antichrists were once associated with the true believers but apostatized from the faith. All this pertains to their outward movements only, for John says that they were not of us. Church workers are not mind readers, and if unconverted persons go through the motion of obedience to the Gospel there is no way to detect or avoid it. They obeyed the form of doctrine but not “from the heart” (Rom 6:17). Such persons will wait until some pretext appears when they will show their true sentiments by turning against the church and making false accusations. It is true that John is writing directly about antichrists which means those who oppose Christ. The principle is the same, for whoever opposes the church of Christ is an enemy of Him. At heart they are disbelievers in Christ but show their spite against Him by turning against his church.
1Jn 2:20. Unction is used figuratively from the ancient custom of pouring oil on the heads of those who were to act in the service of the Lord. In its spiritual sense it refers to the enlightening that the Lord bestowed on the apostles, enabling them to impart the necessary information to the members of the body of Christ. Ye know all things means they know all that pertains to life and godliness (2Pe 1:3).
1Jn 2:21. Not all inspired writing was done to give new information but also to supplement what had been given (2Pe 1:12-13 2Pe 3:1). Another consideration is that people who have already shown an interest in the truth are glad to have it repeated to them. No lie is of the truth. Anything that denies a truth is bound to be a lie, and John was particularly concerned about the truth of the divinity of Christ.
1Jn 2:22. This verse is virtually the same as verse 18 (See 1Jn 2:18).
1Jn 2:23. God and Christ are two distinct persons but are one in divinity, hence to reject the one is the same as rejecting the other. The last half of this verse is not found in some copies of the Greek text and for that reason some translations leave it out. However, it does not add anything that disagrees with the rest of the New Testament, hence no harm is done by retaining it at least to the extent of endorsing it.
1Jn 2:24. Heard from the beginning refers to the truth given to the world through Him who is “from the beginning” (chapter 1:1). If this truth remains in us we will be in fellowship with both the Father and the Son.
1Jn 2:25. The reward for being in fellowship with God and his Son is not of a temporal nature; it is eternal life. That reward will be given to those who are faithful until death, since it will not come in this world but in the next which will be “when earthly things have ceased to be.”
1Jn 2:26. To seduce a person means to mislead him or cause him to stray from the truth. There were many deceivers in the world who were so expert in their false reasoning that the uninformed were easy victims. For this reason the apostle was writing the warning information to the disciples.
1Jn 2:27. Anointing is from the same word as “unction” in verse 20. Need not that any man should teach you. This means that no uninspired man should be depended upon for teaching on the great story of Christ. They had the enlightening that had come to them from Christ through the inspired teachers. With such divine guidance they were able to abide in him who is Christ.
1Jn 2:28. Little children is general and is the same endearing term that John uses in the beginning of the chapter. With the advantage of the spiritual enlightenment the disciples are exhorted to abide in him. This means more than merely being in Christ at times but it should be always. No man knows when Jesus is coming hence it is important always to be in His favor. In that case the disciple will not be taken unawares and be made ashamed, but will be confidently looking for Him.
1Jn 2:29. The Lord is righteous and hence can beget righteous offspring only. The exhortation is for the disciples to honor their family reputation by being righteous.
Commentary on 1Jn 2:18-29 by N.T. Caton
1Jn 2:18-Little children, it is the last time.
As to what is meant by the last time, different views are had. Dr. Macknight thinks it refers to the end of the Jewish commonwealth. With this view I can not agree. My reason is, the writer knew that the Jewish age had ceased when the Master said, “All authority is given unto me,” and he could not refer to the fall of Jerusalem, because, if I be not mistaken, at the time of this writing that noted city was in ruins. In my judgment, he meant to have them understand, the Christian age would be the last dispensation of mercy God would vouchsafe to the world. Salvation must be had in this age, and in accordance with the provisions therein tendered, or not at all. No other presentation would be offered to the children of men.
1Jn 2:18 –That antichrist shall come.
They had been told that a certain thing would take place, and when it did, thereby they should know that it was in the last time or age. Christ means the anointed one. One claiming to be the Christ, and not being the one born at Bethlehem, would be a false Christ or an antichrist. Now, since the antichrist was foretold by the Master himself, and the time of coming being fixed in the last time, and John, affirming that already in his day there were many antichrists, we may know assuredly that we live in the last time or age-an age which will continue until the final consummation of all things. From the time of Christ until the end of the world will the Christian age continue.
1Jn 2:19-They went out from us.
The meaning here is clear. All these antichrists are simply apostates. They sprang up from the Church of Christ; and yet, while this is true, they were not of us. They were not genuine converts; they were simply wolves in sheep’s clothing. Their profession of faith in Christ was a mere pretense, for had they the whole-hearted faith in the Son of God, so requisite to citizenship in his kingdom, they would have continued humble, loving disciples. As it is, their going out from among us, and their bitter opposition to the doctrine of Christ, is an exhibition of the fact that they never were really and truly converted. They only made a pretense of conversion, the better to enable them to carry out their own designs.
1Jn 2:20-But ye have an unction.
Anointing is a better word than unction. The anointing is from the Holy Spirit; and, being so anointed, they are qualified to discriminate between the true and the false teachings and teachers. Because of this anointing or unction, they were enabled to know all these things.
1Jn 2:21-I have not written unto you.
It was not because they were ignorant of the truth that the Word was made flesh, but because they knew this as the truth, and that they were capable of discerning the difference between the truth and a lie. If these false teachers or antichrists promulgated their heresies, they should be prepared to resist the same, and their utterances would be heresies if they denied that Jesus Christ had come in the flesh.
1Jn 2:22-Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ?
To deny that Jesus is the Christ is to be guilty of falsehood. These apostates lyingly deny him. They reject the testimony he gave of himself in his teachings and in his miracles, and thereby deny both Father and Son. Such are antichrists.
1Jn 2:23-Whosoever denieth the Son.
Any one who shall deny that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, does not acknowledge the Father, but rejects his testimony given by him at the baptism of Jesus and on the Mount of Transfiguration. And anyone who acknowledges that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, thereby acknowledges both God and his Son.
1Jn 2:24 —Let that therefore abide in you.
What the apostles preached from the beginning of the gospel age, that the Word was made flesh, which you believed, and by which you were controlled in your actions subsequent to your whole-hearted reception of this truth, let that abide in you. Continue to embrace trustingly that teaching; you heard it from the beginning. If this remain in you as your firm belief, you will continue in the fellowship of the Father and the Son.
1Jn 2:25-And this is the promise.
The result of this steadfastness in the faith preached from the beginning, and which is lovingly entertained in this fellowship with the Father and Son, is this eternal life; an unending enjoyment of companionship with the Father and the Son in heaven’s blessed abode.
1Jn 2:26-These things have I written.
The things concerning antichrists, opposers of Christ, false teachers-those that would lead you astray-these things, so written, commence at the 18th verse and continue to the end of the chapter, and should be carefully studied, and the warnings therein mentioned implicitly observed and followed.
1Jn 2:27-But the anointing which ye have received.
The Lord had promised the Holy Spirit to guide the apostles into all truth. The apostles were empowered to confer spiritual gifts in the first age of the church. This was a necessity until all things should be perfected. Those to whom John wrote were possessed of these gifts-these anointings-and were thus provided with an infallible guide to know the truth and to detect the error, and needed no teaching from man. They had a teaching from on high, which was the very truth and no lie. Hence, all they needed was an exhortation to abide by this teaching.
1Jn 2:28-And now, little children.
The exhortation is earnest. Abide in him-that is, in Christ, in his teaching, doctrine, and precepts, for he shall appear once again to judge the world. At that time, if we abide in him, do his bidding, building up thereby characters fitted for companionship with God, and the Son, and the holy angels, and the good of all ages, we shall have confidence of our acceptance of him, and will not appear before him in fear, doubt, or shame.
1Jn 2:29-If ye know that he is righteous.
As through the apostle would ask a question: Do you know that God is righteous? He has promised that everyone who obeys his Son shall inherit eternal life. The doing of righteousness, then, is required of those who lay claim to this promise. They only are the heirs of this inheritance. You need make no mistake if you believe God to be righteous, and that he has promised eternal life to those who do righteousness; such only are heirs of that promise, and all such are begotten of him, belong to his family, and none others.
Commentary on 1Jn 2:18-29 by Burton Coffman
1Jn 2:18 –Little children, it is the last hour: and as ye heard that antichrist cometh, even now have there arisen many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last hour.
It is the last hour … The apostles had asked Christ to tell them when the end of the world was coming, when the temple would be destroyed, and when the Christ would come. To these three questions, Jesus gave a composite answer (Matthew 24), but not distinguishing for them the fact that these events would not all occur simultaneously; however, Jesus did deny them altogether any answer as to the time of his Second Coming (Mat 24:36; Mat 24:42). It is therefore the height of presumption to construe John’s words here as meaning that Christ was coming soon. “The last hour” here has no reference whatever to the Second Coming and must be referred either to the destruction of Jerusalem or the end of the world. Significantly, since Jesus failed (purposefully) to distinguish for his apostles that those two events (the end of all things and the destruction of the city of Jerusalem) would be separated in time by thousands of years, it may be legitimately supposed that the apostles might have thought they would come at the same time; but, even more significantly, no apostle ever said so. There is not a line in the New Testament that has any such declaration in it. However, in the providence of God, the destruction of Jerusalem was foreordained to be a type of the overthrow of the entire world; and in giving the signs that would precede the first event, Christ of necessity gave in those very signs the sign of the end of the world; but it was necessary for Christ to make the signs of Jerusalem’s overthrow plain enough for the Christians to be forewarned and to enable them to escape from the city before its destruction. Otherwise, Satan might have accomplished the total destruction of the church itself in that disaster. Heeding those signs which Jesus had given, John here prophesied the destruction of Jerusalem (perhaps supposing also that the end of the world was at hand, a supposition that he did not state, even if he thought it). And what sign did he stress? That there were antichrists who had already appeared. This was the very sign that Jesus had definitely connected with the destruction of the temple (involving also, of course, the overthrow of Jerusalem): “There shall arise false christs and false prophets” (Mat 24:24). It was also indicated by Christ as being a signal for the “elect” to “flee out of Judea” (Mat 24:16), to avoid “the end of the world”? Certainly not! To avoid the destruction of Jerusalem? Of course! Thus it is absolutely certain that John in this passage was not warning the Christians to get ready for the end of the world, but to get ready to flee the city of Jerusalem. That this is exactly what John and the other apostles did in such statements as this is proved by the fact that the Christians did flee Jerusalem, not a single one of “the elect” losing his life in the holocaust that overthrew the city in A.D. 70.
Despite the fact of “antichrist” being popularly understood as “a personal opponent of Christ at the end of time,”[47] and also being identified with Paul’s “lawless one” (2Th 2:8), there is absolutely no authority for such views. The “antichrists” in this passage are plural; the “lawless one” is singular; Christ associates the antichrists, or false christs, with the need for the “elect” to flee out of Judea (Mat 24:16); whereas, Paul associated the “lawless one” with the “coming of the Lord,” an association that John refrained from making here. Neither the “man of sin” nor “the lawless one” of Paul’s writings has any connection whatever with what John wrote here. It was long after John wrote that “the name of antichrist was appropriated to that great adversary of Christ ‘the man of sin’ (2Th 2:3).”[48] John’s antichrist “falls far short of Paul’s `son of perdition.'”[49]
As ye have heard, antichrist cometh … Although only the singular is used here, it is clear from what John at once wrote that there were many of these. Where had the Christians heard of this? From the teachings of Christ, as recorded in Matthew 24.
It is the last hour … Before leaving this, the error of the rendition should be noted. As Stott said:
This phrase should be translated “a last hour.” Westcott makes much of this and writes that the omission of the definite article “seems to mark the general character of the period and not its specific relation to `end.’ It was a period of crucial change.”[50]
Morris also stressed the same thing, saying, “There is no article with hour. John is not saying it is the last hour, but that it is a last hour.”[51] In the light of such truth, how ridiculous, therefore, it is for men to write such dogmatic opinions as the following:
“The last hour …” The apostles undoubtedly anticipated the coming of Christ in the near future, etc.[52]
“The last hour …” The expected immediate second coming of Christ to judge the world.[53]
Nothing but the unwillingness of Christians to admit that the apostle John could seem to be much in error about the nearness of the day of judgment could have raised a question about language so plain. This can only mean “the last hour before the Second Coming of Christ.”[54]SIZE>
A hundred other examples of the same kind of scholarly blindness could be cited. It never seems to have occurred to such commentators that there is no hint whatever of the Second Coming in this verse.
It is true of course that those who suppose that the apostles “expected” the coming of Christ to take place concurrently with the destruction of Jerusalem are probably correct in that supposition. Why? Because Jesus himself so mingled the prophecies of the two events that such a supposition might easily have followed. However, true exegesis of the New Testament does not consist in reading into its sacred texts what people suppose the apostles thought, but rather consists in studying what they wrote; and John wrote nothing here, either of the judgment or of the second coming of Christ.
[47] New Catholic Bible, op. cit., New Testament, p. 315.
[48] John Wesley, Explanatory Notes upon the New Testament (Naperville, Illinois: Alec R. Allenson, Inc., reprint, 1950), p. 908.
[49] Harvey J. S. Blaney, op. cit., p. 372.
[50] John R. W. Stott, op. cit., p. 108.
[51] Leon Morris, op. cit., p. 1264.
[52] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 1056.
[53] James Russell Williams, Compact Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 600.
[54] A. Plummer, op. cit., p. 25.
1Jn 2:19 –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 made manifest that they all are not of us.
From this verse it is plain that the “antichrists” were Christians who had defected from the truth. Their departure from the apostles and from the church indicated their hostility to the truth. Many of these were no doubt teaching the most shameful errors, justifying, or rationalizing the most wicked and dissolute behavior on the basis of Gnostic or other false teachings they had adopted.
Such a verse as this, of course, is made use of as a crutch for the proposition that a person “once saved is always saved”; however, it should be carefully noted that John did not here write of the false teachers that “they never had been of us,” but that at an unspecified previous time, they were not. This is even more clear in the last clause where the word is not that they had never been of us, but that they are not of us. Their departure from the faith became final at some point prior to their leaving; but there is no suggestion by the apostle that those who departed had never been truly converted at the beginning of their Christian association. The fallen angels were not wicked from the beginning but became so; and Judas was not wicked when the Lord chose him as an apostle, but he fell “through transgression.”
1Jn 2:20 –And ye have an anointing from the Holy One, and ye know all things.
As Morris said, “This is just another way of saying that all of them had received the gift of the Holy Spirit.”[55] that is, the earnest of the Holy Spirit, which is given to all believers in Christ following their repentance and baptism into Christ (Act 2:38 f).
And ye know all things … The marginal reading here, “you all know,” is a better rendition because John did not mean they knew everything, else he would hardly have been writing to them. The thing he referred to here is apparent in other places in the letters of John, namely, that, as regards the basic doctrine of Christianity, called “the word” or “the truth” or “the light,” the Christians had been adequately enlightened on all these things before they could become Christians. (Jer 31:31-35). Thus he refuted the boasts of the false teachers that they had any vital new truth that could have benefited anyone. When people hear and obey the gospel of Christ, they have already reached the zenith of all knowledge as it regards the eternal redemption of the soul. There is another view of this passage which accepts it as a reference to one of the charismatic gifts mentioned by Paul in 1Co 1:8, that is, “the discerning of spirits.”[56] The thought behind this is that congregations generally, at the time John wrote, had among their members certain persons endowed with that gift; hence there was no need for them to be led away by false teachers if they heeded the information already available to them from that source. Although the other interpretation is preferred here, this one may not be ruled out altogether as possibly the true one.
[55] Leon Morris, op. cit., p. 1264.
[56] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 54.
1Jn 2:21 –I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and because no lie is of the truth.
This verse is the reason for preferring the first of two interpretations of the preceding verse. Jeremiah had prophesied that under the new covenant, “All would know the Lord, from the least to the greatest of them,” the simple reason behind this being that one must know the truth in all of its essential aspects before he can even become a Christian (Jer 31:31 ff). It is obviously this very truth that John had in mind here.
The “lie” mentioned here is “any doctrine contrary to that taught by the apostles of Christ.”[57]
ENDNOTE:
[57] Ibid.
1Jn 2:22 –Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, even he that denieth the Father and the Son.
A comparison with 1Jn 4:15,1Jn 5:1 f suggests that the type of denial was that of refusing to accept the complete union of God with Jesus Christ. Certain Gnostics and Docetists theorized that Jesus was only a man, the natural son of Joseph, and that “Christ” descended upon him and inhabited his body at the time of his baptism, deserted him for the crucifixion, etc. The exalted view of Christ in John’s writings, and throughout the New Testament refutes such nonsense fully. The Christian believes and confesses that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God, that he is one with the Father, that he, in fact, “was God,” that of his own volition he entered our earth life by means of the incarnation, that he was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit in the womb of the virgin Mary, and that he was born and passed through all the phases of human life without sin, that the power of the Godhead dwelt in him bodily during his ministry enabling the mighty works which were done by him, that he gave his life a ransom for all in his crucifixion, and that he himself arose from the grave, commissioned his apostles, ascended to the Father where he was before, and that he will come again to judge the quick and the dead at the consummation of all things. All the Christians of all the ages have tenaciously held these basic views regarding Jesus Christ our Lord. John was saying in this verse that any denial of such things is falsehood, and that such liars are antichrist. No distinction between the Christ and Jesus is of the truth, but belongs rather to the heresy of the Cerinthians.[58]
ENDNOTE:
[58] David Smith, op. cit., p. 181.
1Jn 2:23 –Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that confesseth the Son hath the Father also.
The denial of the Son of God, through failure to confess him, results in the loss of the Father, because only the divine Son can reveal the Father. “No one cometh unto God but by me,” he said. On the other hand, as John stated it conversely, the meaningful confession of Jesus Christ as the Son of God leads to a full knowledge of God in the forgiveness of sins.
1Jn 2:24 –As for you, let that abide in you which ye heard from the beginning. If that which ye heard from the beginning abide in you, ye also shall abide in the Son, and in the Father.
That which ye heard from the beginning … This is a reference to the gospel truth as proclaimed by the holy apostles of Christ, and as revealed in the sacred New Testament. Absolute and unwavering loyalty and devotion to that message, and to that alone, is here commanded; and the reward of doing so is indicated, those obeying shall abide in the Son, and in the Father.
In the Father, and in the Son … This is a reference to the corporate body of Christ, a conception that was announced by the Lord himself in the analogy of the true vine (Joh 15:1-10). Thus John takes his place alongside Paul in the presentation of salvation “in Christ.” A heavy emphasis upon this has been given throughout this whole series of commentaries; and, for a fuller discussion of it, see Romans 3 in my Commentary on Romans. Significantly, John here made adherence to the original gospel a prerequisite of abiding in God and in Christ. As Stott noted:
Christian theology is anchored not only to certain historical events, culminating in the saving career of Jesus, but to the authoritative apostolic witness to those events. The Christian can never weigh anchor and launch out into the deep of speculative thought.[59]
If the church of Christ in the present time would renew its vitality and increase the effectiveness of its evangelism, then let it return to a greater emphasis upon that which we have heard “from the beginning.”
ENDNOTE:
[59] John R. W. Stott, op. cit., p. 113.
1Jn 2:25 –And this is the promise which he promised us, even the life eternal.
No other religion, not any philosophy, nor any code of ethics, nothing whatever, throughout the long course of human history has ever promised eternal life; but this eternal life “in Christ” is the promise of our holy religion. It is not one of the side-effects or fringe benefits of the faith, but the essential heart of it. It cannot be required by people, nor earned; but it is given to all who are “in God and in Christ,” and are “found in him” (Php 3:9) when the probation of life is over. John himself spelled this out in these epic words:
And I heard a voice from heaven saying, Write, Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from henceforth; yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labors; for their works follow with them (Rev 14:13).
Inherent in this precious and exceedingly great promise is the fact of its being conditional, the primary condition being that of abiding in God and abiding in Christ, that in turn being conditional, everything in the last analysis being contingent upon whether or not people hear and obey the original gospel, that is, “abide in that which ye have heard from the beginning.”
1Jn 2:26 –These things have I written unto you concerning them that would lead you astray.
This is John’s reminder that he is still discussing the subject of the antichrists and their false teachings, a crisis which he met by a profound and forceful reiteration of what he himself and all of the apostles had preached from the very beginning of Christianity. Christians must still meet philosophical deceit and cunning perversions of the holy faith in exactly the same manner. No new teaching is needed, the original gospel being relevant in all situations tending toward apostasy.
1Jn 2:27 –And as for you, the anointing which ye received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any one teach you; but as his anointing teacheth you concerning all things, and is true, and is no lie, and even as it taught you, ye abide in him.
The anointing which ye received of him abideth in you … Although this is speaking of the Holy Spirit (see under 1Jn 2:20), it is clear from the last clause where the neuter pronoun and past tense are used that he is referring to the written records of the gospel. It was that which they had been taught; and it was that which was abiding in them, there being no difference whatever in the word of God dwelling in Christians and the Holy Spirit dwelling in them. See full discussion of this in my Commentary on Galatians, pp. 97-99. Moreover, it was that original gospel which was alone sufficient for all their needs, enabling John to say, “Ye need not that any one teach you.” The holy gospel has already given (note the past tense) all of the teaching that Christians will ever need.
That it is that gospel (we now call it the New Testament) of which John taught in this verse is proved by a careful reading of it:
That gospel is no lie.
It is the truth.
It taught you.
As a consequence of its teachings, you abide in him.
From this, it is absolutely certain, as Roberts stated it, that, “It is obvious that John does not mean that each individual has his own channel of communications by means of the Holy Spirit.”[60] Furthermore, John did not teach that Christians had no need of further study. The whole passage must be understood as a plea for the all-sufficiency of the gospel as the complete and effective refutation of heresies. “The only safeguard against lies is to have abiding in us both the Word that we heard from the beginning and the anointing that we received from him.”[61]
[60] J. W. Roberts, The Letters of John (Austin, Texas: R. B. Sweet Company, 1968), p. 72.
[61] John R. W. Stott, op. cit., p. 115.
1Jn 2:28 –And now, my little children, abide in him; that, if he shall be manifested, we may have boldness, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.
Abide in him … See under 1Jn 2:24. This admonition is actually the whole point of the letter.
If he shall be manifested … This shows that John was by no means certain that such a period as “a last hour” which he had already positively identified as coming soon, would also include the coming of Christ; but there is a suggestion in this that he might have thought it very possible. Note, however, that he made no assertion regarding the second coming, except this, that if it did turn out that the Lord wag manifested in the events John knew were so shortly coming to pass, the Christians should strive to be ready for the Lord.
Abide in him that … we may have boldness … Such boldness will result from the identification of Christians with their Lord. Those who are “in him” and abide “in him” until his coming, or until death, will indeed be amply supplied with boldness in his presence.
It will be observed that John used a number of expressions having a great similarity:
We are in him (God) (1Jn 2:5).
A new commandment is true in him and in you (1Jn 2:8).
He that loveth … abideth in the light (1Jn 2:9).
The word of God abideth in you (1Jn 2:17).
Let that (the word of the gospel) abide in you (1Jn 2:24).
… Ye also shall abide in the Son (1Jn 2:24).
… and (ye shall abide) in the Father also (1Jn 2:24).
The anointing … abideth in you (1Jn 2:27).
Ye abide in him (1Jn 2:27).
My little children, abide in him (1Jn 2:28).
In all of these passages and a dozen others like them in John’s letters the meaning is identical. Could there be any conceivable difference between one who was abiding “in the light” and another who was abiding “in the word of God,” or “in God,” or “in Christ,” or “in the Holy Spirit?” Conversely, could there be any distinction between persons “walking in the truth” (as in 3Jn 1:3) and those in whom the “word of God abideth”? Again, reference is made to a more lengthy study of this phenomenon in my Commentary on Galatians, pp. 97-99. In full consonance with the unity of thought in all such passages is the over-all consideration that every single one of them means, in the last analysis, believing and obeying the commandments of God, a fact inherent in the very next verse where John spoke of “doing righteousness” as evidence of one’s having been born again.
1Jn 2:29 –If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that everyone also that doeth righteousness is begotten of him.
He is righteous … is a clear reference to Jesus Christ whose coming was just mentioned; however, “begotten of him” in the very next clause means “begotten of God.” As Smith said, “The abrupt transition evinces St. John’s sense of the oneness of the Father and the Son.”[62] In this sentence, he used “him” as a reference first to the son and then to the Father. He did a very similar thing in 1Jn 2:27 where the indwelling Spirit (the anointing) is said to “teach you all things,” whereas, it is clear that the gospel itself was their actual source of teaching. The essential unity of all such elements is the basis for seemingly diverse statements. After all, the word of God is the word of the Spirit (Eph 6:17); and was it not the Holy Spirit who guided the apostles (including John himself) into all truth? (Joh 14:16; Joh 16:13). An over-compartmentalizing of such Scriptural teachings as those of this chapter will only frustrate and confuse the student. The great wealth of John’s thoughts in this glorious chapter contrasts with the poverty of language itself (not the apostle’s lack), which is incapable of any complete revelation to people of the marvelous and glorious nature of the salvation which the eternal Father has made available to people in Jesus Christ our Lord.
ENDNOTE:
[62] David Smith, op. cit., p. 182.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Loyalty to Truth
1Jn 2:18-29
The Holy One is surely the risen Savior, who has passed into the heavens, whence He bestows the Holy Spirit as a sacred chrism on meek and trustful souls. We can say with the psalmist, Thou anointest my head with oil. Let us seek fresh anointing. I shall be anointed with fresh oil, Psa 92:10. Whenever we attempt to do Gods work, we should be able to say, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, and He hath anointed me. The anointed soul understands things hidden from the wise and prudent, 1Jn 2:27.
We must hold the Word of Christ by perpetual reiteration and meditation; only so shall we be able to abide in Him. This abiding life involves not merely that we shall work for God, but that God will work through us. The abiding branch bears much fruit, because the energy of the vine is set free to work its will through its yielded channels. A life of abiding communion with Christ will never be ashamed in this or in any other world.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
III. TRUTH AND ERROR
CHAPTER 2:18-27
This section contains a warning which is addressed to the babes, the little children, young believers. Truth and error, are contrasted. Seducers were trying to lead them astray, for we read in 1Jn 2:26 : These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. He reminds them that it is the last time, a striking expression, for since it was written centuries have come and gone, and what was true then is true now, that it is the last time; only the Lord is still patiently waiting, not willing that any should perish. Christ was manifested, the truth revealed in Him and the world rejected Him and His truth. Satan became the god of this age, with the mystery of iniquity working in it from the very beginning. Antichristianity is not a new thing of our times; it was here from the very beginning. John writes, Even now there are many antichrists, whereby we know it is the last time. And the last time has its last days which are now upon us.
Anti-Christianity is increasing on all sides till the Antichrist, the man of sin, will be revealed (2Th 2:1-17). An antichrist is not a vicious lawbreaker, an out and out immoral man. An antichrist is one who rejects Christ, who does not allow His claims; who denies that Jesus is the Son of God. It is of great significance that John speaks of the antichrists in his day as having gone out from among the professing body of Christians (1Jn 2:19). They were not true believers but only professed belief, they had left the flock and gone into apostasy, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
In 1Jn 2:22-23 we have a picture of the antichrists of Johns day and a prophecy of anti-christianity down to the end of the age when the great opposer will appear in a person, the personal antichrist. Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son hath not the Father. He who confesseth the Son hath the Father also. Antichristianity is the denial that Jesus is the Christ. It includes every denial of the person of the Lord Jesus, the denial that He is the Son of God come into the flesh, His virgin birth and that He was sent by the Father. Such denials were prominent in Johns lifetime. Gnosticism was troubling the Church. They denied the Messiahship, and deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. Other systems were present in embryo, known later by the name of Arianism, etc. Denying the Son they denied the Father also.
These are important statements for our own days, the last days of the present age. What began in the days when the Holy Spirit penned this Epistle is now full-grown in the world. It is all about us in various forms throughout the professing church, only with this difference, the apostates in the beginning were more honest than the apostates in our times. They were in the professing church and when they began their denials they went out, separated themselves from the true Church.
The apostates of today remain in the professing church and maintain outwardly a Christian profession, so that it becomes the solemn duty of true believers to separate themselves from these enemies of the cross of Christ. They deny both the Jewish hope, which centers in the promises of the Messiah, and the Christian hope, which is the Father and the Son. They reject the truths of the Old and the New Testament. They speak of the God of Abraham, who promised the seed to come from Abraham, as a tribal god. They make common cause with the Jewish apostates in denying that there are predictions concerning the Messiah in the Old Testament.
We give but one illustration of this fact. Jews deny that the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah is a Messianic prophecy; the servant of Jehovah is explained to mean the nation Israel and not the Christ of God. This infidel view is held today by many preachers and teachers in various evangelical denominations, in spite of the fact that the New Testament tells us that it is Christ of whom Isaiah spoke. Rejecting Isa 7:14, the prophecy concerning the virgin birth, they reject the virgin birth itself, and brazenly utter the greatest blasphemy which human lips can utter, that Christ was born like any other man. They speak of Him as a great leader and teacher, as having divinity in Himself, in a degree higher than found in the rest of the race. His absolute deity is not believed; that He is the propitiation for sins is sneered at, that He will ever appear again in His glorified humanity in a second visible and glorious manifestation is ridiculed.
Thus antichristianity is present with us in the camp of Christendom in such a marked and universal way as unknown before. With denying Christ they deny the Father. All that we have seen in this Epistle concerning Him, the true God and the eternal life, fellowship with the Father and with His Son, walking in the light, the advocacy of Christ and loving the brethren, is denied by them. They speak of love; they speak of toleration and the Christ- spirit. But those who are the brethren, who contend for the faith once and for all delivered unto the saints, who believe on the Son of God, in His sacrificial work on the cross, are denounced by them, belittled and branded as fanatics. And the end is not yet. Let them continue in their evil ways under the guidance of the lying spirit of darkness and they may yet stoop to actual persecution of those who constitute the body of Christ. The conditions in Christendom today are the most solemn the true Church of Jesus Christ has faced. The heading up in the Antichrist cannot be far distant. As John writes these Christ-deniers, these blasphemers, who make the Holy Son of God the offspring of–we dare not finish the sentence! –may speak of the Father, but they have not the Father, because only those who confess the Son of God, Christ come in the flesh, have the Father.
John writes all this to the babes, young believers, warning them against the lie. He useth the word liar, for such the apostates are. In using this word repeatedly, he reveals his character as Boanerges–the son of thunder. Then he tells these babes how they may be guarded and kept. He reminds them that they have the anointing of the Holy One, that is, the Holy Spirit dwelling in their hearts and with Him they have the capacity to know and judge all these things. If they follow His guidance in and through the Word they would be kept in the truth and guarded from accepting the lie.
Let us again remember it is not the fathers, or the young men John addresses, but the babes. Here is a strong argument against the teaching so widespread among true believers, that the Holy Spirit is not given to a believer in regeneration, but that the gift of the Spirit must be sought in a definite experience after conversion. This is a serious error which opens the door to the most subtle delusions as found in certain Holiness sects and Pentecostalism. 1Jn 2:24 gives another instruction and exhortation. It is the truth concerning Christ, which they had heard from the beginning, which abiding in them will keep them. And besides the anointing which ye have received of Him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you, but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in Him. The teachers in this instance who tried to seduce them (1Jn 2:26) were not gifts of Christ to His body, but false teachers, who came with a lying message. They did not need these teachers; the Holy Spirit was their teacher and infallible guide, but never apart from the written Word. All false teaching they were to repulse and fall back upon Him who guides in all truth. They were safe against all error as they abided in that.
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
Little: 1Jo 2:1, Joh 21:5
it is: 2Ti 3:1, Heb 1:2, 1Pe 1:5, 1Pe 1:20, 2Pe 3:3, Jud 1:18
ye have: 1Jo 4:3, Mat 24:5, Mat 24:11, Mat 24:24, Mar 13:6, Mar 13:21, Mar 13:22, Act 20:29, Act 20:30, 2Th 2:3-12, 1Ti 4:1-3, 2Ti 3:1-6, 2Ti 4:3, 2Ti 4:4, 2Pe 2:1
antichrist: 1Jo 2:22, 1Jo 4:3, 2Jo 1:7
whereby: 1Ti 4:1, 2Ti 3:1
Reciprocal: Gen 14:14 – his brother Dan 11:34 – cleave Mat 13:47 – and gathered 1Co 10:11 – upon 2Co 11:3 – so 2Co 11:13 – false Gal 1:7 – pervert Gal 5:10 – but Col 2:4 – lest 2Th 2:7 – doth 2Ti 3:8 – resist Tit 1:10 – there 1Pe 4:7 – the end 2Pe 2:2 – many 1Jo 4:1 – many
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Jn 2:18. Little children is used in the sense that is explained at the first verse of the chapter. Last time could have a number of definitions on account of the second word, hence the thought must be gathered from the use that is made of it. The doctrine of Christ is not directly taught in the Old Testament while He is the central figure in the New. The verse speaks of antichrists (which means against Christ) so we understand John means we are living in the last Dispensation. Such is a logical conclusion because the basis of the whole system is belief in Christ (not Moses).
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
The antichrists as errors of the darkness: their mark and character, with the protection against them.
1Jn 2:18. Little children: the address is to all; and with reference to the several characteristics acknowledged in them, their knowledge of the Father and of Him who was from the beginning, and their victory over the evil one. While the knowledge and the victory run through this whole section, it is more immediately linked with the preceding passeth away.
It is the last time. This is St. Johns final and only expression for the Christian dispensation as answering to the last days of Isa 2:2, the end of the days of Deu 4:30, the afterward of all the prophets. When our Lord introduced the fulness of time, another afterward began: in His own teaching, for He spoke of this world and the world to come (Mat 12:30); and in that of His apostles. Each of them uses his own phrases for the distinction: St. Paul speaks of the present time and the- coming glory (Rom 8:18), and St. Peter of the last days or the last of the days, and to be revealed in the last time (1Pe 1:20; 1Pe 1:5). St. Johns is the last time here at the beginning of the section, and at the end of it His appearing (1Jn 2:28), which closes the time. The passing away of the world, and the continuance of the hour or time, run on coincidently: when He shall be manifested will end both. During the old economy, and in the rabbinical interval with its the present world and the coming world, the division of history was the advent of Messiah; now that He has come, the dividing point is His second coming. It is important to remember that the apostle first speaks solemnly of this last time as distinguished from the passing world. Its relation to antichrists comes in afterwards, and gives a new colouring to the thought.
And as ye heard that antichrist Cometh, even now have arisen many antichrists; whereby we perceive that it is the last time. Our Lord had predicted not one false Christ, but many, as coming, not immediately before the end of the world only, but from the time of His departure (Mat 24:4; Mat 24:24). And St. John pays homage first and pre-eminently to his Masters word, referring, however, rather to His false prophets, and calling them by a name used only by himself antichrists, not as taking the place of Christ, but as opposing Him. He includes also, of course, the many predictions of his brethren, to the effect that false teachers would bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them (2Pe 2:1). This is the pith of his argument: we discern that we are in the last revelation, because side by side go on the development of truth and error concerning the one Person who is the sum of revelation. But in his way to this argument. St. John introduces an allusion to what they had heard from St. Paul, interpreting Daniel, concerning one antichrist, whom he mentions only to show that his predecessors are already in the world. As he is not, like St. Paul, referring to the signs of the last days in the last time, but only of the last time generally, he does not dwell on the future personal antichrist. He does, however, set his seal to St. Pauls teaching that a man of sin will be revealed, exalting himself above all that is called God, that is, as St. John interprets it, above all that is called Christ who is God, denying the Father and the Son in a form of opposition which only the fulfilment will explain. Though he does not define his own word more fully, and its explanation must be sought in St. Pauls Epistles and the Apocalypse, he here gives a new name to St. Pauls man of sin, the antichrist or opponent of Christ pre-eminently, and he adds that he cometh, or, in solemn Biblical language, is still the coming one, as opposed to the antichrists who have become such or arisen.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Our apostle having warned them against the danger of covetousness in the foregoing verses, he cautions them against the danger of deceit in these; he tells them, that this is the last time of the Jewish dispensation, and that the destruction of their city, temple, and polity, was now at hand; and as they had heard that antichrist should come, accordingly now there were many antichrists come; that is, opposers of Christ, and deniers of him to be the Christ; and by the swarming of these seducers and false teachers now, according to our Saviour’s prediction, Matthew 24 they might well conclude it was the last time.
Observe next, These antichrists are described by the communion which they once were of, to wit, the Christian communion; They went out from us, from us apostles, and from us Christians, being false brethren, and unsound Christians; for if they had been of us, as members of the same body, and had joined with us apostles, in planting and propagating the same Christian faith, They would no doubt have continued with us, professing the same faith, and preaching the same doctrine which we do; but they left us, that it might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
Here note, That these antichristian impostors had been in the bosom of the church, and made a profession of the Christian faith; so did the false apostles, the judaizing teachers, mentioned Act 25:1; so did Simon Magus, Nicholas, and Cerinthus. The church’s seeming members proves her worst friends, the foxes within do more mischief that the wild boar without.
Quest. But is it not then lawful to depart from the communion of a church whereof we have been formerly members?
Ans. Yes, if she departs from herself: if she degenerates and grows so corrupt a body, and be so far infected, that we cannot communicate with her without sin, which was th case between us and the church of Rome, her doctrines were erroneous, her worship idolatrous; we went out from them, because they went out from the ancient apostolical church. Non fugimus; sed fugamur: Not we, but they made the separation, and consequently the schism lies at their door.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
A Troubling Hour
If the book of 1 John was written prior to the destruction, John may have been referring to it. If after, Thomas suggests, John refers to the season of anti-Christs, who are spoken of later in the book. Other New Testament verses predicted the coming of an anti-Christ or lawless one ( 2Th 2:3-4 ; 2Th 2:8 ; Rev 13:11 ). John wrote of many who exhibited the spirit that would characterize him. This may well refer to those who denied Christ came in the flesh. Robert Shank well notes concerning 1Jn 2:19 that John is specifically writing of the anti-Christs and not making a general statement about all who have believed or ever will believe.
At the time of their withdrawal, they were not of the same obedient spirit as John and the brethren to whom he wrote. It helped the church when they went out because it was easier to see them as false teachers. Those represented as stony ground believers, as well as Hymenaeus and Alexander, would be examples of those who were once in the fold but went out. To be able to go out, one must first be in, which strongly suggests a change ( Mat 13:20-21 ; 1Ti 1:19-20 ; 2Pe 2:20-22 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
1Jn 2:18. Little, or young, children The former caution against the love of the world belongs chiefly to old experienced Christians, or those who have attained some considerable knowledge and experience in divine things, because they are most apt to offend in that particular; this against seducers belongs chiefly to younger Christians, who are less established, and therefore more liable to be seduced. It is the last time Greek, , it is the last hour, namely, as some understand it, of the duration of the Jewish Church and state, a sense of the expression which is favoured by the consideration that it was the period in which our Lord had foretold the rise of many false Christs. And therefore the apostle here cautions them against such deceivers, intimating, at the same time, for their encouragement and comfort, that the power of their persecutors, the Jews, would speedily be broken. Doddridge, however, Wesley, and many others, by the last hour, or last time, here understand the last dispensation of grace. As if the apostle had said, The last dispensation that God will ever give to the world is now promulgated, and it is no wonder if Satan endeavour, to the utmost, to adulterate a system from which his kingdom has so much to fear. And as ye have heard that antichrist shall come , cometh. The word , antichrist, is nowhere found but in Johns first and second epistle. It may have two meanings. For if the preposition , in , denotes in place of, the name will signify one who puts himself in the place of Christ: consequently antichrist is a false Christ. But if the preposition denotes oppositions, antichrist is one who opposeth Christ. The persons to whom this epistle was written had heard of the coming of antichrist in both senses of the name. For the first sort of antichrists were foretold by our Lord, Mat 24:5 : Many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ, and shall deceive many. The second sort were foretold Mat 24:11, Many false prophets will arise and deceive many. From what John hath written, 1Jn 2:22 of this chapter, and chap. 1Jn 4:3-4; 1Jn 2:7, there is reason to think that by antichrist he meant those false prophets, or teachers, who were foretold by our Lord to rise about the time of the destruction of Jerusalem, and who were now gone abroad. Some of these denied the humanity of Jesus Christ, others of them denied his divinity; and as both sorts opposed Christ, by denying the redemption of the world through his death, it is probably of them chiefly that John speaks in his epistles. When the apostle mentions these false teachers collectively, he calls them the antichrist in the singular number, as St. Paul called the false teachers collectively, of whom he prophesied, 2Th 2:3, the man of sin. But when John speaks of these teachers as individuals, he calls them many antichrists, in the plural number. Macknight. Thus also Mr. Wesley: Under the term antichrist, or the spirit of antichrist, he includes all false teachers as enemies to the truth; yea, whatever doctrines or men are contrary to Christ. It seems to have been long after this that the name of antichrist was appropriated to that grand adversary of Christ, the man of sin, 2Th 2:3. Even now are there many antichrists Many seducers revolted from Christianity, (1Jn 2:19,) who were actuated by an antichristian spirit, and do secretly undermine the interest of Christ, and so make way for the grand antichrist. The preterit tense, , is here used to signify, not only the existence of many antichrists at that time, but also that there had been many antichrists who had gone off the stage; whereby we know that it is the last time The last hour of the Jewish state, namely, by Christs prediction, Mat 24:24.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
ARGUMENT 5
LAST ANTICHRIST AND THE LORDS COMING
18. Little children, it is the last hour, and as ye have heard that Antichrist cometh, and now many Antichrists are here; then we know that it is the last hour. On the dark eclipse of the bright Eden day Satans dark night set in.
Rom 13:12. As the Gentile age is the last of Satans night of ten thousand years, symbolized by the six days of toil preceding the glorious millennial Sabbath. If John was in the last hour of Satans night eighteen hundred years ago, surely we are in the last minute! Glory to God! I believe it, and hail with rapture the millennial dawn! Antichrist means a counterfeit Christ, or an opponent of Christ, as anti means instead of and also means against. As the Jewish element was still in the leadership of the Church, doubtless the Antichrists in Johns day were Jews, who either claimed to be Christ themselves, or because they were unconverted were the practical opponents of Christ. At the present day the Pope is the great Antichrist who, doubtless, during the Tribulation will usurp the throne of Christ, both political and ecclesiastical, raising the floodgate of persecution. The present age is literally flooded with Antichrists, i.e., counterfeit preachers unacquainted with God, preaching a sinning religion, which is Satans, arrogating to themselves the power to have sins remitted in baptism, and teaching salvation by human works, ecclesiastical tyrants usurping the throne of Christ, claiming the right to rule a church, which belongs to Christ alone. The Holy Ghost is the spiritual successor of the personal Christ (Joh 16:7), and has the sole right to rule the Church of Christ, all His rivals occupying the attitude of Antichrist.
19. The great trouble with this multitude of Antichrist, i.e., counterfeit, preachers is their personal ignorance of experimental salvation.
20. Truly you have an unction from the Holy One, and you all know. The common reading of the English, You know all things, has led to fanaticism, discarding human teachers.
21. The Bible is the grand thesaurus of inspired truth, containing all things essential to life and godliness.
22, 23. There is but one God, with three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. As these three persons are all identical in the divine unity, yet separate and distinct in their offices, perfecting the plan of salvation, radical heresy relative to either person apostatizes into the Antichristhood. Some of the Antichrists of the present day reject the divinity of Christ;
but most of them reject the office and works of the Holy Ghost. Satan is now in his last ditch, prosecuting his final campaign against God. Having
been defeated both in the dispensation of the Father and Son, he is now using all of his artillery, laying under contribution earth and hell against the divine personality, office, work and administration of the Holy Ghost, leading forth his millions of Antichristian preachers, who are doing their utmost to usurp the throne of the Holy Ghost, take the Church into hand and rule over it.
24-26. The great salient fact of Gospel grace is the eternal divine life, imparted by the Holy Ghost in regeneration and made to abound in sanctification.
27. The unction which you receive from Him abideth in you, and you have no need that any one may teach you, but as this unction teacheth you concerning all things, and is true and no falsehood, and as He has taught you, abide in Him. Oh, the grandeur and the majesty of the redemptive scheme! Fortifying us at every point of Satans compass, giving us complete victory throughout, making us safe in lifes probation, as in heaven, if we faithfully utilize the means of grace. He first gives us His own eternal life in regeneration. Then He destroys all of our inward enemies in entire sanctification, filling us with the Holy Ghost, our infallible Guide in all things. This heavenly unction is our fortification against these Antichrists, i.e., the devils preachers, who will do their utmost to get us to follow and obey them instead of the Holy Ghost. Verily, they are almost sure to succeed with all who are not fortified and guided by the unction of the infallible One. Worldly ones follow Satan down to hell, while church members follow these Antichrists to the same dismal doom. It is not understood that this holy unction precludes human teaching by speech and pen. On the contrary, the Holy Ghost pursuant to this wonderful unction utilizes holy men, women and babes as His faithful teachers. Two hundred millions of martyrs have sealed their faith with their blood. Guided by the infallible unction they shouted in the fire and triumphed over the grim monster.
28. And now, little children, abide in Him, in order that if He may appear we may have holiness and not shrink with embarrassment from Him in His presence. The true attitude of New Testament saintship is entire sanctification, the fullness of the Spirit and constant expectancy of the personal Jesus. When He went away He left the Holy Ghost in charge to
prepare His people for His glorious return and millennial reign. When we are really emptied of sin and filled with the divine unction, we are ready to go forth to meet Him with a shout. Coming, in this verse, is parousia, and means presence, corroborating the prophecies of His coming to stay and reign forever; doubtless, as in His former presence on the earth, anon appearing and disappearing in different parts of the world.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
1Jn 2:18-28. The Antichrists and their Teaching.Here John deals with the false teachers, who embody the spirit of Antichrist and betoken by their appearance the speedy end of the world and the return of Christ. These teachers had left the Church because in spirit they had never really belonged to it. Christians had, through the Holy Spirit, power to detect their falsehoods, notably those concerning the person of Christ. Hence John urges his readers to abide in what they had been taught, their spiritual anointing giving him confidence that they will do so, and that they will stand unashamed before Christ at His coming.
1Jn 2:18. ye heard: the reference is to the Christian teaching they had received. Jewish writings spoke of the Messiahs coming being preceded by an outbreak of fierce hostility to God, sometimes concentrated in some outstanding figure. The idea passed into Christian teaching concerning the return of Christ (2Th 2:3*, 1Ti 4:1). False Christs were also expected (Mat 24:5; Mat 24:24), and thus the term Antichrist was applied to the malignant being (or those embodying his ideas and spirit) who opposed the Church in the last hour, i.e. the period immediately preceding Christs return.
1Jn 2:20 a. He refers to the Holy Spirit which had been given them, the Holy One who gave it being God, or perhaps Christ.
1Jn 2:22. See Introduction. We know God as Father through knowing Christ as Son. The Sonship constitutes and interprets the Fatherhood. Those, therefore, who destroyed Christs sonship by denying that there had been a real Incarnation of God in Him, or held that Christ was a Divine on which had been only for a time united with the man Jesus, the two thus being distinct, surrendered thereby the Christian doctrine of God.
1Jn 2:24. which . . . beginning: cf. 1Jn 2:7. The belief that Jesus was Divine had been taught in the Church from its foundation, or at least to these believers at their conversion.
1Jn 2:25. life eternal: 1Jn 1:2*. Eternal life, as John conceives it, is dependent upon fellowship with the Father and the Son (Joh 17:3*).
1Jn 2:27. The Holy Spirit granted to the readers will by His inward illumination save them from being beguiled by the false teachers. The range and truth of His teaching is emphasized.ye abide: the indicative is better than the imperative (mg.). Because Johns readers were already abiding in Christ, he could exhort them (1Jn 2:28) to continue doing so.
1Jn 2:28. if he shall be manifested: the conditional form of statement implies no doubt as to Christs actual return. Only the time was uncertain.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Verse 18
Antichrists; false teachers; whose doctrines and characters are more particularly described in verses which follow.–Whereby we know, &c. The Savior had predicted the appearance of false Christs and false prophets, as a sign of the approach of great changes, the nature of which was only obscurely intimated. (Mark 13:22-30.) It is probable that John here refers to that prediction. In precisely what sense, however, he uses the expression the last time, is somewhat uncertain.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
2:18 {16} {n} Little children, {17} it is the last time: {18} and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
(16) Now, he turns himself to little children, which nonetheless are well instructed in the sum of religion, and wills them by various reasons to shake off laziness, which is too familiar with that age.
(n) He uses this word “Little” not because he speaks to children, but to allure them the more by using such sweet words.
(17) First, because the last time is at hand, so that the matter suffers no delay.
(18) Secondly, because antichrists, that is, such as fall from God, are already come, even as they heard that they would come. And it was necessary to warn that careless and fearless age of the danger.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
2. Resisting the Antichrists 2:18-27
John needed to alert his readers to special deceptions they would encounter to enable them to identify and defend themselves against these temptations. Previously John had been less direct in dealing with false teachers who perverted the truth about intimacy with God. Now he became more direct and labeled them antichrists.
John again used a three-fold structure at the beginning of this section of the text. He described three signs or marks: of the end (1Jn 2:18-19), of the believer (1Jn 2:20-23), and of living in the light (1Jn 2:24-25). 1Jn 2:26-27 recapitulate and develop the revelation in 1Jn 2:18-25.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Signs of the end 2:18-19
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
John probably used a different Greek word translated "children" (paidia, also in 1Jn 2:12) because it implies a child who learns. His readers needed to learn what he now revealed.
In the drama of human history all of John’s readers, including ourselves, play our part in the last act. Throughout the New Testament the writers regarded the present inter-advent age, after the Incarnation and before the Lord’s return, as the last hour or the last days. This is the final period before the Lord Himself breaks into history again. Then the first stage of the new age will be judgment (the Tribulation) and the second stage blessing. In the second stage Jesus Christ will rule directly over human beings, first in the Millennium and then in the new heavens and the new earth.
The revelation concerning the appearance of the world ruler who will exalt himself against God was familiar to John’s audience (Dan 11:36-45; 2Th 2:3-5; et al.). However even as John wrote, many little antichrists, people who exalt themselves against God, had arisen. John saw this as evidence that the appearance of the Antichrist was not far away. Antichrists are those who oppose Jesus Christ and His teachings, not just people who profess to be the Messiah. [Note: Stott, pp. 104-5; Plummer, p. 107; Barclay, p. 73.]
"Anti ["against"] can mean substitution or opposition, but both ideas are identical in the word antichristos (in N.T. only here, 1Jn 2:22; 1Jn 4:3; 2Jn 1:7)." [Note: Robertson, 6:215.]