Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 John 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.
7. For ] Or, Because. Some would make this conjunction introduce the reason for 2Jn 1:8: ‘Because many deceivers have appeared look to yourselves.’ But this is altogether unlike S. John’s simple manner; to say nothing of the very awkward parenthesis which is thus made of ‘This is Antichrist.’ ‘For’ or ‘Because’ points backwards to 2Jn 1:5-6, not forwards to 2Jn 1:8. ‘I am recalling our obligations to mutual love and to obedience of the Divine command, because there are men with whom you and yours come in contact, whose teaching strikes at the root of these obligations.’
many deceivers ] The word for ‘deceiver’ ( ) reaches that meaning in two ways. 1. ‘Making to wander, leading astray.’ 2. ‘Vagabond,’ and hence ‘a charlatan’ or ‘impostor.’ The former meaning is predominant here. It is rare in N. T. Comp. Mat 27:63. S. John uses it nowhere else, but not unfrequently uses the cognate verb, ‘to lead astray’ ( 1Jn 1:8 ; 1Jn 2:26; 1Jn 3:7).
are entered into the world ] Rather, are gone forth ( AB and Versions) into the world: literally, went forth; but here the English perfect idiomatically represents the Greek aorist: in 1Jn 4:1 we have the perfect in the Greek. ‘The world’ here may mean ‘the earth’ or ‘human society’: or we may take it in S. John’s special sense of what is external to the Church and antichristian; see on 1Jn 2:2. The meaning may be that, like the many antichrists in 1Jn 2:18, they went out from the Church into the unchristian world. Possibly the same persons are meant in both Epistles. Irenaeus (a.d. 180) by a slip of memory quotes this passage as from the First Epistle ( Haer. III. xvi. 8).
who confess not ] More accurately, as R. V., even they that confess not: the many deceivers and those who confess not are the same group, and this is their character, unbelief and denial of the truth. ‘Confess not’ = deny.
that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh ] This is not quite accurate; nor does R. V., ‘that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh’, seem to be more than a partial correction. Rather, that confess not Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, or possibly, that confess not Jesus as Christ coming in the flesh. See on 1Jn 4:2, where the Greek is similar, but with perfect instead of present participle. These deceivers denied not merely the fact of the Incarnation, but its possibility. In both passages A. V. and R. V. translate as if we had the infinitive mood instead of the participle. The difference is, that with the participle the denial is directed against the Person, ‘they deny Jesus ’; with the infinitive it is directed against the fact, ‘they deny that He cometh ’ or ‘ has come.’ Note that Christ is never said to come into the flesh; but either, as here and 1Jn 4:2, to come in the flesh; or, to become flesh (Joh 1:14). To say that Christ came into the flesh would leave room for saying that the Divine Son was united with Jesus after He was born of Mary; which would be no true Incarnation.
This is a deceiver and an Antichrist ] Rather, This is the deceiver and the Antichrist: a good example of inadequate treatment of the Greek article in A. V. (see on 1Jn 1:2). Luther is more accurate; ‘Dieser ist der Verfhrer und der Widerchrist’. The transition from plural to singular (see on 2Jn 1:6) may be explained in two ways; 1. The man who acts thus is the deceiver and the Antichrist; 2. These men collectively are the deceiver and the Antichrist. In either case the article means ‘him of whom you have heard’: ‘the deceiver’ in reference to his fellow men; ‘the Antichrist’ in reference to his Redeemer.
This completes the series of condemnatory names which S. John uses in speaking of these false teachers; liars (1Jn 2:22), seducers (1Jn 2:26), false prophets (1Jn 4:1), deceivers (2Jn 1:7), antichrists (1Jn 2:18; 1Jn 2:22; 1Jn 4:3; 2Jn 1:7). On the Antichrist of S. John see Appendix B.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
7 9. Warnings against False Doctrine
7 9. The third element in the triplet of leading thoughts once more comes to the front, but without being named. Love and obedience require, as the condition of their existence, truth. It is in truth that ‘the Elder’ and all who love the truth love the elect lady and her children; and they love them for the truth’s sake. Truth no less than love is the condition of receiving the threefold blessing of grace, mercy, and peace. And it was the fact that some of her children were walking in truth, while others seemed to be deserting it, which led the Apostle in the fulness of his heart to write to her. All this tends to shew the preciousness of the truth. Love of the brethren and loyal obedience to God’s commands will alike suggest that we should jealously guard against those who by tampering with the truth harm the brethren and dishonour God and His Son.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
For – Hoti. This word for is not here to be regarded as connected with the previous verse, and as giving a reason why there should be the exercise of mutual love, but is rather to be understood as connected with the following verse, 2Jo 1:8, and as giving a reason for the caution there expressed: Because it is a truth that many deceivers have appeared, or since it has occurred that many such are abroad, look to yourselves lest you be betrayed and ruined. The fact that there were many such deceivers was a good reason for being constantly on their guard, lest they should be so far drawn away as not to receive a full reward.
Many deceivers are entered into the world – Are abroad in the world, or have appeared among men. Several manuscripts read here, have gone out into the world, ( exelthon,) instead of have entered into, eiselthon. The common reading is the correct one, and the other was originated, probably, from the unusual form of the expression, have come into the world, as if they had come from another abode. That, however, is not necessarily implied, the language being such as would he properly used to denote the idea that there were such deceivers in the world.
Who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh – Who maintain that he assumed only the appearance of a man, and was not really incarnate. See the notes at 1Jo 4:2-3.
This is a deceiver – Everyone who maintains this is to be regarded as a deceiver.
And an antichrist – See the notes at 1Jo 2:18; 1Jo 4:3.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
2Jn 1:7
For many deceivers are entered into the world.
The prevalence and danger of negative error in matters of faith
I. The nature of the error denounced. It did not consist so much in openly impugning the principles of the gospel as in not confessing them. It was insinuated rather than avowed.
II. The tendency of the error denounced. In temporal matters, that form of evil which is most injurious is not always that which is most so in appearance. The pestilence that walketh in darkness is not less fatal than the destruction which wasteth at noonday. In our religious concerns it is the same. The description will apply to those of the present day who, without openly patronising Socinianism, secretly advance it by the systematic omission of the Scriptural doctrines of Christs deity and atonement.
1. The relation which the points omitted have to the other facts and doctrines of the Christian system.
(1) The object of Christs advent.
(2) The tendency and results of Christs advent.
(3) The demerit of sin.
(4) The love of God in our redemption.
(5) The motives of Christian obedience.
2. The tendency which the omission has to subvert the principles omitted. Never hearing any distinct ideas in regard to the person and work of the Redeemer, the people come to regard them as matters of doubtful disputation, if not as positively unscriptural.
Lessons–
1. Let this subject furnish a criterion of truth and error.
2. Let us learn the danger of erroneous principles in matters of religion.
3. Let us avoid those connections which would lead to the adoption of erroneous principles. (R. Brodie, M. A.)
Warning against false teachers
1. False teaching is injurious to faith, especially the faith of young Christians. Gnosticism is not actively taught in our day, but other forms of evil teaching abound. As a system of ethics, they say, the gospel is the best which has reached us from ancient times, but its miracles are legendary. We ask–Are not the Incarnation and the Resurrection the two pillars on which the whole fabric rests? How much of the literature of the New Testament will remain after the removal of these pillars? Some would say that it matters not what our sons and daughters believe, so long as their character is good. But does not belief shape character? Character is built on the great principles of the gospel, and our whole energy is required to complete it.
2. The great fact which is fundamental to the gospel, and animates the faith of the believer, is that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. The very mystery which envelops the fact stamps it with Divinity. That one of the gods should descend from heaven, become incarnate, and bear universal sway, was a thought and a desire which haunted the ancients. Their philosophers, thinkers, and poets felt the need of a restorer of purity, prosperity, and joy to the human race. The best of mortals had failed in the attempt to do so, and the gods were too far off, and too unsympathetic, to undertake the task. Some one of heavenly birth must come, and He came, who would unite in Himself power, wisdom, love, goodness, holiness, and method, at once both Divine and human. This regulating thought is also the all-animating thought of faith.
3. To profess this truth is both a duty and a privilege. The verb , to speak the same language, suggests a beautiful thought in this connection. The elect lady had taught her sons the language of Bethlehem, Bethany, and the Cross. The deceivers did not speak that spiritual language. There was an imminent danger lest the children might pick up their shibboleth. For is it not the case that we are influenced by the words we speak? (T. Davies, M. A.)
The ingratitude of deceivers
The Volucellae have a strong resemblance to the humble bee. Certain kinds make use and abuse of this resemblance to introduce themselves fraudulently into its nests, and to deposit their eggs therein. When these eggs have hatched, the larvae, which have two mandibles, devour the larvae of their hosts the bees. This is the return they make for the hospitality they have received. (Scientific Illustrations.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 7. For many deceivers, c.] Of these he had spoken before, see 1Jo 4:1, &c. And these appear to have been Gnostics, for they denied that Jesus was come in the flesh. And this doctrine, so essential to salvation, none could deny but a deceiver and an antichrist. Instead of are entered in, many excellent MSS. and versions have , are gone out. The sense is nearly the same.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
See 1Jo 2:18,22; 4:3.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Asloveand truthgo hand in hand (2Jo1:3,2Jo1:4),he feels it needful to give warning against teachers of untruth.
For giving the reason why he dwelt on truthand on love,which manifests itself in keeping Gods commandments (2Jo1:6).
many (1Jo2:18;1Jo4:1).
areentered The oldest manuscripts read, have goneforth,namely, from us.
confessnot … Jesus … in the flesh the token of Antichrist.
iscome Greek,coming. He who denies Christs comingin the flesh, denies the possibilityof the incarnation; he who denies that he hascome,denies its actuality.They denied the possibility of a Messiahs appearing, or coming,in the flesh [Neander]. I think the Greekpresent participle implies boththe first and the second advent of Christ. He is often elsewherecalled theComing One(Greek),Mat11:3;Heb10:37.The denial of the reality of His manifestation in the flesh, at Hisfirst coming, and of His personal advent again, constitutesAntichrist. The world turnsawayfrom God and Christ, busily intent upon its own husks; but to OPPOSEGod and Christ is of the leaven of Satan [Bengel].
Thisis a, etc. Greek,This (such a one as has been just described) is thedeceiver and theAntichrist. The manywho in a degree fulfil the character, are forerunners of the finalpersonal Antichrist, who shall concentrate in himself all thefeatures of previous Antichristian systems.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
For many deceivers are entered into the world,…. By whom are meant false teachers, who are described by their quality, “deceivers”, deceitful workers, pretending to be ministers of Christ, to have a: value for truth, a love for souls, and a view to the glory of God, but lie in wait to deceive, and handle the word of God deceitfully; and by their quantity or number, “many”, and so likely to do much mischief; and by the place where they were, they were “entered into the world”; or “gone out into the world”, as the Alexandrian copy and some others, and the Vulgate Latin and Syriac versions read; [See comments on 1Jo 4:1]; and by their tenet,
who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh; these were not the Jews who denied that Jesus was the Christ, though they would not allow that Christ was come in the flesh; but these were some who bore the Christian name, and professed to believe in Jesus Christ, but would not own that he was really incarnate, or assumed a true human nature, only in appearance; and denied that he took true and real flesh of the virgin, but only seemed to do so; and these are confuted by the apostle, 1Jo 1:1; and upon everyone of these he justly fixes the following character.
This is a deceiver and an antichrist; one of the deceivers that were come into the world, and one of the antichrists that were already in it; and who were the forerunners of the man of sin, and in whom the mystery of iniquity already began to work; for antichrist does not design anyone particular individual person, but a set of men, that are contrary to Christ, and opposers of him.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
| Deceivers Condemned. | A. D. 90. |
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. 8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. 9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
In this principal part of the epistle we find,
I. The ill news communicated to the lady-seducers are abroad: For many deceivers have entered into the world. This report is introduced by a particle that bespeaks a reason of the report. “You have need to maintain your love, for there are destroyers of it in the world. Those who subvert the faith destroy the love; the common faith is one ground of the common love;” or, “You must secure your walk according to the commands of God; this will secure you. Your stability is likely to be tried, for many deceivers have entered into the world.” Sad and saddening news may be communicated to our Christian friends; not that we should love to make them sorry, but to fore-warn is the way to fore-arm them against their trials. Now here is, 1. The description of the deceiver and his deceit–he confesses not that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh (v. 7); he brings some error or other concerning the person of the Lord Jesus; he either confesses not that Jesus Christ is the same person, or that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ, the anointed of God, the Messiah promised of old for the redemption of Israel, or that the promised Messiah and Redeemer has come in the flesh, or into the flesh, into our world and into our nature; such a one pretends that he is yet to be expected. Strange that after such evidence any should deny that the Lord Jesus is the Son of God and Saviour of the world! 2. The aggravation of the case–such a one is a deceiver and an antichrist (v. 7); he deludes souls and undermines the glory and kingdom of the Lord Christ. He must be an impostor, a wilful deceiver, after all the light that has been afforded, and all the evidence that Christ has given concerning himself, and the attestation God has given concerning his Son; and he is a wilful opposer of the person, and honour, and interest of the Lord Christ, and as such shall be reckoned with when the Lord Christ comes again. Let us not think it strange that there are deceivers and opposers of the Lord Christ’s name and dignity now, for there were such of old, even in the apostle’s times.
II. The counsel given to this elect household hereupon. Now care and caution are needful: Look to yourselves, v. 8. The more deceivers and deceits abound, the more watchful the disciples must be. Delusions may so prevail that even the elect may be endangered thereby. Two things they must beware of:– 1. That they lose not what they have wrought (v. 8), what they have done or what they have gained. It is a pity that any religious labour should be in vain; some begin well, but at last lose all their pains. The hopeful gentleman, who had kept the commands of the second table from his youth up, lost all for want of less love to the world and more love to Christ. Professors should take care not to lose what they have gained. Many have not only gained a fair reputation for religion, but much light therein, much conviction of the evil of sin, the vanity of the world, the excellency of religion, and the power of God’s word. They have even tasted of the powers of the world to come, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit; and yet at last lose all. You did run well, who hindered you, that you should not obey (or not go on to obey) the truth? Sad it is that fair and splendid attainments in the school of Christ should all be lost at last. 2. That they lose not their reward, none of it, no portion of that honour, or praise, or glory that they once stood fair for. That we (or you, as in some copies) receive a full reward. “Secure you as full a reward as will be given to any in the church of God; if there are degrees of glory, lose none of that grace (that light, or love, or peace) which is to prepare you for the higher elevation in glory. Hold fast that which thou hast (in faith, and hope, and a good conscience), that no man take thy crown, that thou neither lose it nor any jewel out of it,” Rev. iii. 11. The way to attain the full reward is to abide true to Christ, and constant in religion to the end.
III. The reason of the apostle’s counsel, and of their care and caution about themselves, which is twofold:– 1. The danger and evil of departure from gospel light and revelation; it is in effect and reality a departure from God himself: Whosoever transgresseth (transgresseth at this dismal rate), and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. It is the doctrine of Christ that is appointed to guide us to God; it is that whereby God draws souls to salvation and to himself. Those who revolt thence, in so doing revolt from God. 2. The advantage and happiness of firm adherence to Christian truth; it unites us to Christ (the object or subject-matter of that truth), and thereby to the Father also; for they are one. He that abideth (rooted and grounded) in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. By the doctrine of Christ we are enlightened in the knowledge of the Father and the Son; by it we are sanctified for the Father and the Son; thereupon we are enriched with holy love to the Father and the Son; and thereby prepared for the endless enjoyment of the Father and the Son. Now you are clean through the word which I have spoken to you, John xv. 3. This purity makes meet for heaven. The great God, as he has set his seal to the doctrine of Christ, so he puts a value upon it. We must retain that holy doctrine in faith and love, as we hope or desire to arrive at blessed communion with the Father and the Son.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Deceivers (). Late adjective (Diodorus, Josephus) meaning wandering, roving (1Ti 4:1). As a substantive in N.T. of Jesus (Mt 27:63), of Paul (2Co 6:8), and here. See the verb ( ) in 1Jo 2:26 of the Gnostic deceivers as here and also of Jesus (Joh 7:12). Cf. 1Jo 1:8.
Are gone forth (, alpha ending). Second aorist active indicative of , perhaps an allusion to the crisis when they left the churches (1Jo 2:19, same form).
Even they that confess not ( ). “The ones not confessing” ( regular negative with the participle). The articular participle describes the deceivers ().
That Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh ( ). “Jesus Christ coming in the flesh.” Present middle participle of treating the Incarnation as a continuing fact which the Docetic Gnostics flatly denied. In 1Jo 4:2 we have (perfect active participle) in this same construction with , because there the reference is to the definite historical fact of the Incarnation. There is no allusion here to the second coming of Christ.
This (). See 1John 2:18; 1John 2:22; 1John 5:6; 1John 5:20.
The deceiver and the antichrist ( ). Article with each word, as in Re 1:17, to bring out sharply each separate phrase, though one individual is referred to. The one par excellence in popular expectation (1Jo 2:22), though many in reality (1John 2:18; 3John 1:7).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Deceivers [] . See on we deceive ourselves, 1Jo 1:8. Are entered into [ ] . Rev., are gone forth into. The A. V. follows the reading eijshlqon entered into. The tense is the aorist, strictly rendered, went forth. It may indicate a particular crisis, at which they went forth from the Christian society.
Who confess not [ ] . The article with the participle describes the character of this class of deceivers, and does not merely assert a definite fact concerning them. Compare Mr 14:41, “other women which came up with Him” [ ] . Confess. See on Mt 7:23; Mt 10:32.
Is come [] . Wrong. The verb is in the present participle, coming, which describes the manhood of Christ as still being manifested. See on 1Jo 3:5. In 1Jo 4:2 we have the manifestation treated as a past fact by the perfect tense, ejlhluqo. ta has come. Rev., that Jesus Christ cometh. So in 1Th 1:10, thv ojrghv thv ejrcomenhv is the wrath which is coming; which has already begun its movement and is advancing : not merely, as A. V., the wrath to come, which makes it wholly a future event. See on lingereth, 2Pe 2:3.
An antichrist [ ] Rev, rendering the definite article, the antichrist. See on 1Jo 2:18.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
The Peril of Embracing False Doctrine
1) “For many deceivers” (hoti) because many deceivers – (deluding ones); John’s admonition to a Jesus Christ truth-and-love walk was because of marauding deceivers and false prophets. Eph 4:14; 1Ti 4:1-3.
2) “Are entered into the world” – (Greek ekselthon) have gone forth into the present world-order.
3) “Who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.”
a) Judaism does not
b) Islam does not
c) Zorasterism does not
d) Agnosticism does not
e) Atheism does not
4) “This is a deceiver and an antichrist” Any person rejecting the Virgin birth revelation of Jesus Christ as the Son of God, the Redeemer, is demon motivated, demon empowered, and demon dominated, 1Jn 4:3. He is an antichrist, one posing instead of, placing himself into the position of Christ, 1Jn 2:18; Rev 13:11-17; Rev 16:13.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
CHRIST AND THE CHANGING ORDER
2Jn 1:7-11.
Sermon preached by Dr. W. B. Riley in the First Baptist Church, Minneapolis, May 21, 1916. OccasionConvention Sunday of Northern Baptists. This chapter is a reprint from the authors volume: Christthe Incomparable.
THE theme of this discourse, Christ and the Changing Order, is somewhat akin to that of a considerable volume brought from the press some years since by another writer. The speaker has no fear, however, lest this discourse, once in print, should in any wise be confused with that volume. The theological cleavage will clearly distinguish them. However, they will have one feature in agreement, namely, the changing order,or that history is at one of its turning points.
The twentieth century presents a crisis in the experience of the Christian Church.
If it be true, that since the days of Kant in philosophy, and Darwin in science, we have lived in a world of thought peopled with new intellectual citizens, as the author of The Church and the Changing Order contends, one need not be surprised to find the thinking of the century rather confused, since these gentlemen, approaching kindred themes from the separate standpoints of philosophy and science, came to exactly opposite conclusions; Kant contending that, in the trial of life, the strongest and best equipped will finally fail, while Darwin insists that the result will be the survival of the fittest,conclusions which really gave occasion to Schopenhauers dictum we are all fools living in a fool world.
When one gives himself to a study of the progress of that so-called modernism, which is supposed to have originated with these men, he is compelled to consent that Schopenhauer had much basis for his remark. Paradoxical as it may sound, John, writing twenty centuries ago, was dealing with this exact propaganda, and we should give candid consideration to what he has to say (2Jn 1:7-11).
Describing their theology, he denominates its representatives as apostles of deception, and brings their propaganda the indictment of infidelity, declaring that all who participate with them are, alike, members of the antichrist. Is he justified in this somewhat rabid arraignment?
THE APOSTLES OF DECEPTION
He describes them after this manner: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.
Careful study of the language used brings out three suggestions.
These were nominal disciples. The phrase employed, are entered in the world, indicates that they had been members of the Christian fraternity, and had used their place in the Church as a vantage point for the propagation of false teachings.
In 1Jn 2:19 we read of certain onesperhaps these samethey 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.
In other words, men who confessed loyalty to Jesus Christ became apostles of another gospel, the advocates of anti-christian teaching.
Even modern warfare, with all its devices for the destruction of an army, has been able to hit upon nothing more effective than to get an enemy within the camp. No men in all England are able, today, to do her injury as those men who dwell within her borders, even joining her army, wearing her uniform, but secretly communicating with and aiding her enemies. The word spy has long been a detested one. As a rule, a man who plays that role is not held in esteem by any save those whose interests he directly represents. Paul, writing a Letter to the Galatians, declared that he had encountered false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out the liberty he and his friends enjoyed in Christ Jesus, and bring them into bondage.
We do not desire to be harsh, nor uncharitable, but we must declare our deepest conviction, namely, that the greatest enemy of any church of Jesus Christ is the man who remains in her, assumes to be one of her teachers, calmly wears her good name, and yet denies the Deity of Him who brought her into being, and disputes the authority of the Book upon which she has, for twenty full centuries, rested her every contention. I regard myself as declaring a most patent truth when I say that modernismso-calledis just such an enemy. By lip and pen, it has alike rejected Jesusthe Christ and repudiated the Bible.
It is a matter of more than passing interest, also, to trace the parallelism between the opponents of Johns description and the present-day opponents of Jesus.
They denied His physical manifestations. The language in which John indicted them is this:They confess not that Jesus Christ is coming in the flesh (R.V.).
The King James Version, as you recall, has it, is come in the flesh. If that translation were correct, it might refer to the first appearance of Jesus. If the text of the 1911 version is correct, who confess not that Jesus is coming in the flesh, then the Second Coming is in the mind of the sacred writer. But in either event, that which these false teachers opposed was the physical manifestation of God in Christ Jesus.
Truly they have their successors. God manifest in the flesh is a miracle of such transcendent import as to be utterly rejected by our advocates of evolution! They almost universally resort to the statements that Jesus, while being Gods best representative, was yet born of Mary and begotten by Joseph. The Virgin Birth is, doubtless, one of those New Testament concepts which, says one of their number, the modern world, under the domination of science, finds it impossible to understand, much less to believe.
Concerning the Second Appearance of Jesus in personal, visible form, known as Messianism, we are blithely told by the same writer that it is a survival of Judaism and its influence and implications must be removed before we can see the essential elements of the Gospel.
Of course, the resurrection of Jesus is another physical manifestation, which, while not expressly mentioned in the text, is involved in the question; and, it is now well nigh the common custom among new theologians to hold that New Testament contention to ridicule. In fact, we are plainly asked the question, If a man believes in a risen Christ without believing in the events of the first Easter Day, or in the objective character of the appearances of Jesus to Paul and the other Apostles, should he be excluded from preaching the Gospel of salvation?, and answered, assuredly not!, and are told that he too, can bring and must bring his conviction of the continued life of Jesus to bear upon men and women.
But this raises the logical and inevitable question,What Jesus is he preaching; and whence does he bring either his Master or his message?
Manifestly it cannot be the Jesus of the Bible, for He was flesh and blood before His crucifixion, and flesh and bones after His resurrection; physical and visible in His ascension, and destined to be visible and personal in His glorious Second Appearance.
What nonsense, then, to imagine that by the adoption of a name to which there was never a corresponding reality, one has created a personality and provided a message. Coningsby Dawsons poetry is the essence of inanity:
If He lived or died, I may not know,For who shall disprove the words of the dead,Or who may approve of the wisdom they said?For me, He is not of the long ago,But speaks in the morn of my life, I know.
Who speaks; and, what does He say?
Is it not true, as one of their own company has confessed, that when we take away the historical Jesus, we take away the only Jesus and remove the Gospel, and thereby change the very definition of Christianity itself, since Christianity, as an embodiment of the Gospel, is a phase of religion determined by historical facts?
Any Jesus, not begotten by the Holy Ghost, born of Mary, crucified on Calvary, raised the third day, ascended to the right hand of God, and destined to descend to the earth and take His throne and reign from sea to sea, is as much the figment of a distempered imagination as are the dreams resulting from an overdose of meat; and any message based upon it has no more claims upon intelligent, thinking men, than do the unintelligible, incoherent babblings of a Mary Baker Eddy.
What would you think of a man who said he believed in George Washington, but not the George Washington who was born in 1732 in Westmoreland County, Virginia, who was the first president of the United States, who led in the Revolution, and whose opinions gave rise and final form to the very constitution of the country itself. He believed rather, in a Washington who never had a visible, physical existence, but whose ideas and spirit dominated the colonies in the Puritan days, and still lives! Nonsense!
Candidly, one finds it difficult to be patient with men who name themselves Rationalists, while dispensing with reason, and call themselves thinkers, while giving proof that they are incapable of clearly stating premises or reaching logical conclusions.
There never was a more just and justifiable indictment made against men than I. M. Haldeman brings against these self-named Moderns when he says:
The Christ they preach never rose from the dead in the body!
The Christ they preach has no body!
Their Christ is a boneless and fleshless Christ!
The Christ of the modern theologian is an immaterial ghost!
Over the doors of some modern theological institutions might well be written, Erected to the Ghost Christ!
Over the pulpits of some modern preachers might be written, Here the Ghost Christ is preached!
Their message is as baseless as their Christ is bodiless!
These teachers John denominated the antichrist.
His language is:This is a deceiver and an antichrist. Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.
A careful study of the Bible will show that the antichrist is a person destined to head up the final but fatal rebellion against God; and yet the Sacred Scriptures equally teach that preliminary to his appearance and preparatory unto the same, is a whole school of men who shall speak against Jesus Christ, incessantly striving to bring God to the level of man, and to exalt man to the height of God.
Fundamental to this whole satanic scheme is the discrediting of the Sacred Scriptures. The man who attempts that is brought to book in Johns catalog of the antichrist. Before one can successfully dispute the claim that Jesus is the Son of God, that God dwelleth in Him, and He in God, he must discredit the whole doctrine of inspiration; and yet, unless he do that adroitly, he may fail even in the judgment of his coveted followers.
What could be more adroit than to insist that the denial of inspiration is not necessarily a denial of a Divine Saviour? They tell us that Jesus is the foundation of our religion, and whatever else we lose, we shall not lose Him. It is written, Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
But back of foundation-laying is work in the quarries. The Scriptures are the quarries of truth. Destroy them and no Christ can be brought forth. Discredit them and no Christ remains, save that moral phantom of the Moderns intellect. If a man bow before him or it, he must concede Mrs. Eddys contention that our behavior is determined by the illusions of mortal mind, and at once and forever part company with the whole goodly company of New Testament apostles and teachers, for in the language of John McDowell Leavitt, That company of notable names knew Jesus Christ by the same sufficient crowning proofs the chemist employs when he analyzes salt, the geologist uses when examining a rock, the astronomer engages when he observes the stars, namely, the senses!
These witnesses affirmed that they had seen and heard and touched Jesus both before and after the resurrection. To the visible, the audible, and the tangible they gave evidence with their blood before the earth and Heaven, and with it, they sealed their testimony. Thus their sincerity is unimpeachable, while they witnessed not to a philosophical opinion, not to a scientific explanation, not to a religious dogma, but to the plain, perceptible fact that Jesus arose from the dead and ascended into Glory.
The author of our text voices it after this manner:
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
(For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)
That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you (1Jn 1:1-3).
He it is that says:Deny that and you are deceivers and of the antichrist, and do become,
THE PROPAGANDISTS OF INFIDELITY
Whosoever goeth onward, as the expression in the original is, and abideth not in the teachings of Christ, hath not God.
It is a significant fact, that in the very word here employed, proagon, and correctly translated goeth onward, we have the term progressive, which has been voluntarily assumed by the critics of the times.
They profess to be the solitary progressives of the hour. They speak of themselves as men who really think. In their advanced circle they claim to include practically every biblical teacher in the world of any scholarly significance.
In youth, their mothers must have told them that if they did not think well of themselves, no one else would, and then forgot to warn them against its too vociferous expression. Against the Thus saith the Lord of the conservatives, they have set up a sacramental phrase, namely, Scholarship is agreed.
If they ever name an exception, they are careful not to name more than one, or, at most two, who are not trailing with this self-elected tribunal.
In spite of the fact that some of us are privileged to minister to many men who represent the most complete scholastic training, and who, in circles of their respective sciences, are widely known and justly honored, and whose loyalty to the authority of the Scriptures and the very Deity of Christ is as unswerving as was that of Paul, it is even denied that the church now numbers among its members any considerable company of the scientifically trained and professional classes.
We are asked, What has become of these college-bred men and women who went out from graduating classes into the wide world?
Possibly these Progressives might make a discovery if they sat down and studied the membership roll of the greater churches of this land, which are, almost without exception, under conservative leadership.
If it be true that in the church at large, not one in fifty members are college graduates, it might bring another revelation than that which our Progressives imagine. The discovery may be made that the conservative churches far exceed this proportion. The speaker knows well one church that multiplies this number many times over, and bears testimony that these college and university men and women are not only among his most capable members, but are notable in their theological conservatism. It is not education that is taking the generation away from the church, but it is skepticism, masking under the name of scholarship.
It is as impossible to make science oppose Scripture as it is to compel God to contend against Himself; and if culture oppose the church, then the child fights its own mother, yea, even the creature, its Creator.
But science falsely so-called, has bespattered the pages of Scripture with interrogation points, and many a college and university student is thereby stumbled. Darwinism, a dogma without scientific data, or, in the words of the famous French scientist Fabre, a theory exploited in big words but destitute of even little facts, has undone alike the superficial student of both Scripture and Science.
It is impossible to start from false premises and reach true conclusions. If, therefore, we have been able as charged to create a test of church membership that compels a man, under the influence of todays scholarship, to abandon not only a life of evil thought and evil action, but also the results of his education, it may be because that education was as far wrong as either his thought or action. The outcome will not only vindicate the church but re-enthrone the Christ.
Exclusive leadership on the part of Moderns is a mere assumption. Mrs. Eddy, however, has illustrated the fact that you may state a thing so positively, and repeat it so often, as to bring the superficial to accept it. She took two of the noblest words known to human speech, Christian and Science, and by combining and adopting them, has brought the unthinking to imagine her to have been an expert in both, and that in spite of the fact that her writings reveal no knowledge whatever of either.
For full fifteen years, or longer, our self-styled Moderns have been asserting their leadership alike in Science and Scripture.
Some have supposed that a thing so often spoken must necessarily be so, and so modernism has accomplished its following. Such students would have been profoundly impressed by the Pharisees prayer, and from the hour of its utterance, would have been his devoted followers. The claim of assured results has made its easy dupes in both the oil and mining enterprises, and the hypercritical profession. Almost without exception the devotees of that modern skepticism which discredits the Deity of Jesus Christ and questions the authority of the Bible, are either still in their tender youth or else had their thinking fatally twisted before they were far out of their teens. Not once in a hundred instances do mature men turn from conservatism to liberalism, and in that instance, the rule is that while the man was mature in years, his early education was both poor and partial, and at forty he had only the intellectual equipment of a lad at twenty. Who knows a single man in whom ripened years and scholarship have combined to produce a skeptic; but there are scores of menmany of them world-famedin whom additional study and experience have wrought an utter revolt from the doubts of youth.
But the greater seriousness of all this John does not disregard.
He charges those who reject the Son with having lost the Father also. Unitarianism, masking under the term Evangelical, proposing to retain God, even though Christ be rejected, has no God, unless John be disputed.
Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father.
Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God.
The New York Presbytery, in ordaining men who dispute the Virgin Birth, thereby deny the inspiration of Scripture, and if it continue to wear the name of Christian, will do nothing better than cloak an infidel form with a profession of faith. The life of Presbyterianism, as a positive Christian force, will depend in no small measure upon its final regard for the Cincinnati Presbyters request that such Unitarians be disfellowshipped.
The history of the past has provided abundant proof of the utter powerlessness of the Unitarian propaganda. It has created no ministry worthy of mention; it has started no missions that have proven virile; it has established no colleges that play conspicuous part in the educational process. It has effected .so few converts from sin to holiness that one sometimes wonders how it keeps courage enough to build an occasional church. Its people are almost universally disciples of Charles Darwin, and with equal unanimity they emaculate the writings of Moses, repudiate the prophecies of Daniel, and laugh to scorn the Apocalypse of John, while Jesus is to them Marys bastard son.
Is it any wonder that John dares to say, Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God?
But now what is, to be the attitude of true Christian men and women toward all of this?
Let John speak again, If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: for he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE ANTICHRIST
According to John Christian fraternity is not far Christs opponents. One of our best commentators tells us that the phrase, If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not, looks not to a social reception, but, rather, to a reception into the house of God, unto Christian fellowship.
The true Christian will not be unfriendly toward an infidel, nor refuse social fellowship with a skeptic. On the contrary, he will show neighborliness for every man visiting his door, and kindness to any one coming to, or going from, the same. But that does not mean his reception into the fellowship of Gods family, nor a benediction upon his infidelity, in Gods Name.
I have no creed to which my neighbor must subscribe, no doctrinal standards to which my acquaintance must come. The Unitarian may be my closest personal friend, and the Universalist my fishing companion, and it is alike my privilege and pleasure to return the bland smile of Mrs. Eddys disciple.
But the fellowship of faith is altogether another thing and cannot be accorded to any who bring not this doctrine God manifest in the flesh.
The moment you create a church that exceeds fellowship in Christ, you introduce into it the seeds of self-destruction.
The weakness of present-day Protestantism is at exactly that point. We are wondering why we are not marking greater progress. We are worrying over subjects of secondary concern. We are searching every nook and corner of church life to discover the elements of weakness in our work. We are saying that by a further federation of forces we will engender power. The exact opposite is true! We are over-federated now. Our affiliations are our fundamental weaknesses. Better a Gideons three hundred that believe God and lap the Water of Life from the fountains of His Word, than the thousands that now leisurely drink from the tasteless springs of skepticism that come from multiplied schools as muddy tepid water does from mole-holes of the Southland in a wet season.
But John has a further word,
He makes our commendation of skeptics a self-condemnation.
He that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
Frankly do some of us confess to making it a part of our life work to mark the man who brings not the teaching of JesusGod manifest in the fleshand to refuse to recommend him to any church seeking our advice.
How can we do otherwise and keep conscience at all? Would we advise any wife to take into her house, as a boarder, a man who would alienate her affections from her husband, and by criticisms finally dethrone him from the headship of the family? Can we advise any church to receive as a pastor a man who denies the Deity of Jesus, and removes from the headship of the Church her own and only rightful Lord?
Believing as we do that He is the very God, the One and only basis of hope for time and eternity, the One and only sufficient moral ideal and inspiring personality, the One and only Saviour from sin; in fact, the One and only way for the worlds redemption, how can we recommend the man who proposes to tear the crown of Deity from His brow, dispute His authority over the conscience and His Lordship over life?
John McDowell Leavitt said truly, Take Jesus from the world and you turn it into gloom. Let Him reign and humanity realizes its dream of light and love. In His system and character are all the marks of a Divine Messiah. But, Jesus false, how black the picture and how inconceivable the consequences! No middle place for this Christ, so perfect in character and so matchless in career. If not from the Holy Ghost in the Virgin, His conception a lie! If angels did not sing at His birth, aid after temptation, and amid agony, and watch at His tomb, narratives of their appearances falsehoods! If no Divine voice at His baptism, his ministry of holiness opening with imposture! If no suffering mortals relieved by His touch and word, His miracles of love fabrications! If no power over Hades, His promise to the thief on the cross a deception! If no resurrection and ascension, fraud carried over life into death itself! If no return in power, then no millennium for this world is possible, and the future will grow increasingly bloody and eventuate in the darkest of nights!
He who mars the Jesus of the Bible, unmakes mankind! He who blots the sentences of sacred Scripture flings a blackness over future history.
Commend the man who discredits Him as a teacher? Ask a church to appoint such to its leadership? Write letters, dexterously dodging the facts involved, in aiding him to cover up his unfaith long enough to be comfortably seated and begin to uncover his skepticism, and thereby break the hearts of his aged parishioners, and destroy the faith of his youthful ones?
Never!! For this would be to be a partaker of his evil deeds. The compromise of truth is a crime against Christ!
The crisis is on! The injunction of Joshua lives again, Choose you this day!
He that hath felt the spirit of the Highest Cannot confound or doubt Him, or deny;Yea, with one breath, O world, though thou deniest, Stand thou on that side, for on this am I.
Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley
3.
Warning of waywardness . . . 2Jn. 1:7-11
(2Jn. 1:7) Because many wanderers have gone out into the world, the ones not confessing Jesus as Christ coming in flesh; this is the deceiver and the antichrist. (2Jn. 1:8) Look to yourselves, in order that you may not lose what we have wrought but that you may receive full wages. (2Jn. 1:9) Everyone going ahead and not remaining in the teaching of Christ is not having God. (2Jn. 1:10) If anyone is coming to you and is not bringing this teaching, do not receive him into (your) house, and speak him no greeting; (2Jn. 1:11) for the one speaking greeting to him is fellowshipping in his evil works.
The pleasure of John at meeting the ladys faithful children is occasioned by the fact that many wandering proponents of gnosticism, having left the fellowship of their home congregations, were going about teaching the heresy in whatever congregations would give them an audience.
It would be difficult to identify the antichrist any more specifically than John does here. The antichrist is any teacher who does not confess that the man Jesus is indeed the eternal Christ coming in flesh.
Here is also the most succinct statement in the New Testament of the incarnation. Together with Joh. 1:14, this statement leaves no room for doubt concerning Johns conviction about Jesus. And it is not Johns alone; Jesus identity is the foundation of the Christian faith and fellowship. (Cf. Mat. 16:17-18)
To turn from this conviction is to lose the entire result of apostolic labor. John and the others had but one message (Cf. Gal. 1:6-9). The Galilean carpenter was the Christ, the only begotten God, the eternal Word dwelling as man among men. It was the preaching of this message which formed the authority by which they offered salvation to individual men and women. (Cf. 1Co. 1:21) It was upon the basis of individual salvation that the obedient were added to the church. (Act. 2:47)
To deny the essential truth of the incarnation was to bring both individual salvation and the family of God to naught. John is so vehement in his denunciation of those who deny this truth; without it the whole Christian Gospel is destroyed. The crown of life, the reward of the Christian, is only to those who remain faithful unto death.
John is so certain of the validity of the claim of deity for Jesus, that he goes one step farther. To deny it is to not have God at all!
The deity of Jesus is either the most profound truth known to man, or it is the most calloused lie ever uttered. Since it is true, the denial of it becomes the most heinous blasphemy. There is no middle ground. Jesus is either the Christ coming as flesh or He is not. Since He is, anyone denying that He is, is antichrist and does not have God at all.
It may be possible, at least theoretically, to know something of God while denying the deity of Jesus, but it is impossible to have God without remaining true to the teaching in the incarnation.
The doctrine, or teaching, of Christ does not mean that which Christ taught. Nor does it refer to teaching about Him. It certainly doesnt refer to the teachings of faith, repentance, baptism, etc. (Cf. Heb. 6:1ff)
The doctrine of Christ, as Robertson so aptly puts it, is that of Christ which is the standard of Christian teaching . . . It is the teaching of Jesus as the Incarnate Christ which is the sin qua non of everything Christian.
A great deal of false teaching has been done in the name of progress. There is a universal desire to move forward. Against this, John warns that, everyone going ahead (or progressing) and not remaining in the teaching of Christ . . . has gone too far. He has progressed until he no longer has God.
This truth has been demonstrated in the twentieth century. At first it was considered progressive to follow the higher critics through a labyrinth of alleged proofs that not all of the Bible is authentic. Certain learned men progressed still farther to the conclusion that, if the Bible were unreliable, its claim concerning Jesus must be myth rather than historic truth. Progress wavered slightly with the advent of Neo-orthodoxy, the crises theology of the mid-twentieth century. From this, progress led to existentialism. The ultimate was finally reached when it was acclaimed that God is dead!
This latest theological fad is but an admission on the part of its proponents that what John said is true; each individual who does not remain in the doctrine of Christ does not have God!
It has ever been the hallmark of false teachers to claim to be progressive; to possess advanced knowledge; to have a monopoly on scholarship. That which denies Jesus as Christ, and so has no God, is no knowledge at all. As Barclay has it, Christianity is not a nebulous, undefined, uncontrolled theosophy; it is anchored forever to the historical figure of Jesus Christ.
There comes a time when even love must draw the line. Indeed one might say there is a line already drawn, beyond which Christian love dare not go. That line is drawn at the doctrine that Jesus is the Christ Incarnate.
It may seem inhospitable, but John instructs us not to invite into our houses, or even to greet one who is known to deny the deity of Jesus! John himself is said to have left the public baths when Cerinthus, the champion of gnosticism, came in! Today, it is more popular to enter into scholarly dialogue with such men!
To do otherwise than turn false teachers away is to partake of the evil of heresy. Here is a lesson desperately needed among many well-intentioned Christians today; particularly in certain academic circles. In times such as ours, as well as Johns, when the church is fighting for its very life against the forces of progressive philosophical theology, it is time to let the redeemed of the Lord say so . . . (Psa. 107:2)
SPECIAL STUDIES
W. CARL KETCHERSIDE
RECEIVE HIM NOT
If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds (2Jn. 1:10-11).
This is one of the twisted scriptures. It has become the handle for every factional tool used to pry apart the living stones in the temple of God. It is the murderous knife employed to dismember the body of the Lord. It was written by the apostle of love to protect the flock of God from prowling wolves who sought to seduce them through denial of the foundational fact that Jesus has come in the flesh. It is now used to convert the sheep into snarling dogs, snapping at each other over every stray scrap of doctrine. It has substituted the law of the pack for the love of the flock.
No other passage so well illustrates the danger inherent in ignoring the context. That the leaders of thought in the Church of Christ should have been betrayed into adopting an interpretation which makes unity impossible and renders ridiculous their vaunted claim to respect for the authority of the word of God, is one of the amazing developments in the restoration movement of which we are heirs. Any use of the written word which make impossible the fulfillment of the prayer and purpose of the Living Word is abuse and misuse. We can never regain our integrity as scholars until we repudiate the current partisan explanation which makes every vagary of thought and dissent an occasion to destroy fraternal relationship and stab love dead at our feet.
What is the doctrine which is so transcendent that one who does not attest to it, must not be allowed to enter the house, nor be given a greeting on the street or in the marketplace? Or, looking at it from the opposite position, what is it that, when advocated is so heinous and so poison to the fellowship, that to merely salute its proponent is to make one a participant in his vicious works? The use of individual cups in the Lords Supper, says one. Bible classes on the Lords Day, says another. Chartered homes to care for orphans, says still another. Advocacy of the pre-millennial coming of the Lord, or of instrumental music, or of missionary societiesall of these are added to the motley list by partisan voices raised to high pitch in the clamor for debate.
The depth of ones love for the family of God can be determined by the relative value of those things for which he is willing to sacrifice or break it up. The triviality of those views elevated to a higher station than the family ties created by the blood of the cross is indicative of the shallowness and superficiality of thought eating like a pernicious cancer at the heart of a great restoration movement in our day. Who can really believe that the apostle who wrote more about brotherly love than any other man, would recommend that we refuse entrance to our homes to those saints who disagree with us about cups, classes, colleges, or collectives for the care of orphans? What sane reasoner can actually conclude that to greet a brother who differs with us about the millennium or instrumental music is to become a participant in some evil deed? The very absurdity of such a conclusion renders obnoxious the common usage of the passage by Church of Christ expositors.
I do not hesitate to say that so long as these men maintain such an unrealistic attitude toward the sacred scriptures they can never make any impact upon the thinking world. They will only be purveyors of prejudice, agents of animosity, and disseminators of distrust. Such explanations are exercises in eisegetics, not exegetics. They inject a meaning into the holy oracles rather than extracting one from them. And while there was a time when dogmatism held men and women in line because the masses could neither read nor write, that day is over. We face another Great Awakening in the religious realm. Enlightened people are growing less satisfied with the dry husks thrown out to them by factional debaters.
To what did John refer by this doctrine? Who were the wandering teachers who were to be refused entrance when they applied for hospitality? What condition existed at the time which made it imperative that the elect lady and her children refrain from giving a greeting to certain teachers? Who were those who went beyond and did not remain in the doctrine of Christ? Surely what they denied must be related to the very fundamental and essential facts upon which Christianity was predicated to require such drastic measures to preserve it inviolate.
General Observations
Every reputable scholar known to us believes that John was writing to counteract the pernicious effects of Gnosticism. Upon no other ground can we account for the approach of his gospel record and first two epistles. Who were the Gnostics? What did they teach? Why were they so dangerous to the Christian concept? How did John become involved in the controversy? It is not our purpose here to analyze this synthetic philosophy, interesting though it might be. We shall be content with supplying our readers with sufficient background material to enable them to see the purpose and intent of John and to recognize how modern interpreters among us have warped and wrested what the apostle wrote. For your own convenience and to aid the reviewers of what we write, we will number the various observations.
1. The word gnostic is from gnosis, knowledge. The Gnostics were the knowing ones. It was believed by the Gnostics that all matter is inherently evil and only spirit is good, Since the spirit was imprisoned in the body, and the body is composed of matter, the chief aim was to free or liberate the spirit. Taking their cue from the Greek mystery religions they taught that only by probing the depths and ascending the heights of knowledge, could that which was real be delivered from the material. This required an elaborate secret ritual coupled with painful, arduous and disciplined investigation and research into the mystical infinite wisdom of God. All men were not equipped to do this, either from lack of time, inclination or ability, and the majority of these would continue on a mere animal plane. The Gnostics were in a class by themselves in that they could go beyond.
2. This idea of a spiritual aristocracy made up of specially endowed thinkers who were on the inside would wreak havoc upon the idea of fellowship. For this reason John emphasizes over and over that all of the saints have access to, and possess, knowledge. The word know appears in its various forms eleven times in chapter two. Ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things (1Jn. 2:20). I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth but because ye know it (1Jn. 2:21). The one who doesnt know where he is going is the one who hates his brother (1Jn. 2:11). In chapter three know is found 8 times, in chapter four 7 times, and in chapter five 7 times. In every instance the disciples are comforted with the thought that knowledge is not the special privilege of the few. Note the recurrence of we know and ye know.
3. The Gnostics held that matter was evil. On this basis they speculated that God could not have created the earth because it is material. By the same token the idea of the incarnation was unthinkable. One group held that Jesus was simply an ethereal person, a mere phantom. They insisted that he never had a real flesh and blood body, that he was pure spirit. These were called Docetics, from dokeo, to appear. John attacked this speculation by affirming that the apostles had heard, seen, scrutinized and handled Jesus with their hands.
4. Cerinthus was the first Gnostic leader whose name has come down to us. He lived in Ephesus where John apparently wrote his epistles. According to Eusebius, the father of church historians, John knew Cerinthus for what he really was. Cerinthus made a distinction between Jesus and the Christ, or Logos. He taught that Jesus was human, the son of Joseph and Mary. But Jesus increased in wisdom and in favor with God, which he could not have done if he had been God, according to Cerinthus. (See Luk. 2:52). When Jesus was thirty years of age, he had lived in such a state of purity that God adopted him, publicly announcing that Jesus was his Son in whom he was well pleased. Upon this occasion the Christ (anointing) descended upon him in the shape of a dove. Cerinthus reasoned that Jesus could not have been God prior to this as he did not have the Spirit of God until it descended upon him. The Christ came upon him at Johns baptism.
He further contended that the Christ (Spirit) could not be killed or made to suffer pain. The human Jesus was nailed to the cross and endured agony but the Christ had withdrawn as he came, and was beyond the reach of men. It is for this reason John insists that, This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ: not by water only, but by water and blood (1Jn. 5:6), It was not just Jesus who came to be baptized but Jesus Christ; it was not just Jesus who was crucified but Jesus Christ. He did not come by water (baptism) only, but by water and blood (crucifixion).
5. The crux of the whole matter as it affected Christian faith lay simply in the fact that a Gnostic could not believe in the incarnation. It was impossible for such a person to admit that the pre-existent Logos was made flesh. This provided a real test. If one, upon being asked, Do you believe that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh? answered in the affirmative, you could be sure he was motivated by the Spirit of God. If he denied or hedged, as the record says, Every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist (1Jn. 4:1-3).
Specific Observations
Having given this meager outline of Gnostic philosophy we turn to consideration of the group of Gnostics against whom John sought to protect the saints. Let us list some of the things about them which we can learn from his writings.
1. We know that these men pretended to have access to a source of knowledge which made them superior in wisdom to the average member of the body. It was their aim to make the Way intellectually acceptable to the philosophic schools by expressing their concepts of Christ in the language of Oriental mysticism. They belonged to an arrogant cult of philosophic aristocrats who claimed to have the ability to go beyond and penetrate the veil of true learning. The idea that Jesus had come in the flesh was spiritual pap for infantile mentalities but could not be countenanced by the advanced reasoner. John declared that the true gnosis was the apostolic testimony and the test of knowledge of God was willingness to receive that testimony. We are of God; he that knoweth God heareth us: he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth and the spirit of error (1Jn. 4:6).
2. We know the Gnostics were respected and received by many and that they were numerous. They were regarded as possessing visionary insight and revelatory power because they were accepted as prophets. For this reason the apostle cautioned the saints to test the spirits because many false prophets have gone out into the world (1Jn. 4:1). John labels them antichrists and says, Even now there are many antichrists.
3. We know these men were traveling from place to place as did many of the philosophers and teachers in the Greek world and they no doubt depended upon the homes they contacted in each community to extend them hospitality. Any such home would then be used as a base for their efforts. It is significant that John says, Many false prophets are gone out into the world. The false prophets were doing what Jesus commissioned the apostles to do.
4. We know that the Gnostics were separatists and schematics and that they abandoned the body of saints to create a sect of their own. The unity of the body is based upon acknowledgment of the great fact that Jesus is the Christ. When men no longer are willing to accept this foundation upon which the community of heaven was planted they become antichrists. 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 (1Jn. 2:19). It is interesting that, in this context, John shows the one creed which can bind us together, repudiation of which will fragment us. Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son (1Jn. 2:22). So long as one accepts fully the fact that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, he remains upon the foundation upon which Jesus said he would construct his community. When he forsakes that foundation he forsakes all that is Christian.
5. We know that even though the Gnostics withdrew they still sought to influence those who allowed that which they had heard from the beginning to remain in them, and who continued in the Son and in the Father (1Jn. 2:24). These false apostles were proselytizers. Under the guise of teaching advanced truth they wormed themselves into any home which would receive them, and led those who dwelt there to deny that Jesus was the Christ. It was to warn against such teachers that John wrote, These things have I written you concerning them that seduce you (1Jn. 2:26).
The reply of those who were solicited by these advanced thinkers was to be simply that they did not need any man to teach them, but having been anointed by the Holy Spirit they had access to all truth, and that truth was always consistent. The additional truth must be measured by what they had formerly been taught by the apostles. 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 (1Jn. 2:27). Those who were taught by the Spirit would abide in Christ, that is, in what they had been taught by the anointing. The Gnostics went beyond and abode not in the doctrine of Christ (2Jn. 1:9).
All history bears out the truth that during the lifetime of John, and in the very area where he resided and wrote, this synthetic philosophy was presented with ruthless disregard for the unity of the congregations. False prophets insinuated themselves into every company of the saints and promulgated their unhallowed speculations. It became necessary to issue blunt warnings to the saints against extending a welcome to such teachers, or allowing their homes to be used as bases from which to launch war on truth. This brings us to an analysis of the short epistle known as Second John. It contains the passage with which we are concerned in this article.
The Second Epistle
We shall not enter into the controversy as to identity of the addressee of this letter. It is my personal opinion that it was written to a Christian sister and her family. It is altogether possible that the congregation of saints met in her home. It will be observed how John speaks of truth and love in the same connection. He does not regard truth as being composed merely of facts which have been verified. Truth is a relationship which transcends human relationships. John loves the elect lady and her children in the truth (2Jn. 1:1). All others who have known the truth exhibit the same love (1). The truth dwells in Gods children and is age-lasting (2). The trinity of divine blessingsgrace, mercy and peacethese are shared in truth and love (3). We walk in truth as required by God (4).
John approaches the primary purpose of his letter of admonition and warning with familiar language. Certain phrases are at once associated with certain writers. One of these phrases used by John is a new commandment. Every such phrase should be considered in the light of its other appearances. That which John wrote to the elect lady will be correctly understood only in conjunction with what he wrote elsewhere upon the same topic. We must never forget that the gospel record and first epistle of John are general. They were written to meet a condition faced by the community of saints at large. The second epistle is specific. It deals with the same condition on a local basis and provides a specific approach to it. But the specific must be understood in the light of the general. One is not qualified to diagnose and treat a specific cancer until he knows the nature of cancer in general.
1. John filled his gospel record and first two epistles with a dissertation on love (agape) but these were not written primarily to be treatises on love at all. They were produced to offset a dangerous philosophy which threatened dissolution of the community by destroying the foundation upon which it was built. Love is the antidote to such a condition because it cements and holds the hearts of the saints together in times of greatest stress. One who reads the writings of John about love will derive much pleasure from the observations of the apostle but he will never understand why John injected the teaching as he did until he remembers that love was a prescription for the body at a time when certain errors were becoming epidemic.
2. John besought the elect lady to remember that he wrote no new commandment. He simply reminded her of the commandment heard from the beginning. He identifies that commandmentthat we love one another (5). Only if we recall constantly the nature of this commandment which was had from the beginning can we ever understand John properly. In 1Jn. 2:7, the brethren are told that John will write no new commandment unto them, but an old commandment which they had from the beginning. They are told that the old commandment is the word which they heard from the beginning.
The word is not the new covenant scriptures. They did not have this from the beginning. The new covenant scriptures grew out of needs created by later circumstances. Philemon was a letter of commendation for a runaway slave, Onesimus, who was returning to his master. Philippians was a letter of thanks for assistance to Paul when he was in prison. First Corinthians was written to deal with a demoralizing state of affairs disclosed by the visiting family of Chloe, and to answer queries in a letter brought by Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus. All of this came later. The word which was heard from the beginning was Love one another.
From the beginning Jesus said, This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you (Joh. 15:12), Again, These things I command you, that ye love one another (Joh. 15:17). John wrote to the elect lady, This is love, that we walk after his commandments (2Jn. 1:6). Those who regard the Way as being a legalistic system lay great stress upon this, but they fail to grasp the significance of the following sentence, This is his commandment, that, as ye have heard from the beginning ye should walk in it. The previous verse tells us that we heard from the beginning was to love one another. This is the commandment of Christ, What John is here saying is, This is love, that we walk after his commandments, and his commandment is that we love one another and walk in that love. But why does John use commandments (plural) and commandment (singular) in the same sense? The answer is found in Rom. 13:9, where we are told that all the commandments are summed up in one word, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. This lifts the comandments of Christ above the level of law to the plane of love. This is the word we had from the beginning.
3. The reason for the admonition to the lady and her children to continue to walk in love is that, 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 (7). Here John pointedly identifies the kind of traveling false teachers against whom he warns the recipients of this epistle. This letter was written to counter the efforts of the Gnostics. The many deceivers who have entered into the world are the many false prophets who are gone out into the world (1Jn. 4:1). The deceivers of whom he now writes are the seducers of whom he has written. These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you (1Jn. 2:26). The things written identify the personages as antichrists (1Jn. 2:18).
The Fundamental Doctrine
4. The elect lady and her children are cautioned, Look to yourselves, that you may not lose what you (or we) have worked for, but may win a full reward (8). The purpose of the apostolic message was to build men in love on the Christhood of Jesus, so that the eternal life they possessed by having the Son might eventually terminate in fulness of joy in his presence. Those who face up to the fact of his divine Sonship in the flesh will be rewarded with fellowship face to face in the future. If we abide in him here we may abide in his presence over there. But if antichrists seduce us to forfeit our faith in the greatest fact in the universe we will lose all. So fundamental is this fact of faith that rejection of it is the fundamental falsehood of this age. Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? (1Jn. 2:22). There is one foundation of salvation and one foundation of damnation. Both are directly concerned with the same fact. He that believeth . . . shall be saved; he that believeth not shall be damned. (I trust that no carping critic will conclude that I have intentionally devaluated baptism in making this point).
5. Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
To whom does the apostle relate the expression, Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ? What is the doctrine of Christ? Let us notice some of the other translations.
Anyone who goes ahead and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God (Revised Standard Version).
No one has God who goes too far and fails to stay by the teaching of Christ (Charles B. Williams).
Whoever goes beyond, and does not remain within Christs teaching, will not possess God (Authentic Version).
Anyone who runs ahead too far, and does not stand by the doctrine of the Christ, is without God (New English Version).
Anyone who is advanced and will not remain by the doctrine of Christ, does not possess God (James Moffatt).
The man who is so advanced that he is not content with what Christ taught, has in fact no God (J. B. Phillips).
It will be noted that these substitute for transgresseth (King James Version) such expressions as: goes ahead, goes too far, goes beyond, runs ahead too far, and advanced. Both Moffat and Phillips indicate by usage of quotation marks that the term advanced is used in a special sense. Those who are under consideration are not really advanced thinkers; they just flatter themselves that they are. These later versions are more nearly correct than the King James Version. The word transgress is a translation of parabaino, and it is true this is found in a few manuscripts. But all of the best copies have proagon, to go ahead, to advance beyond.
This was the very claim of the Gnostics. They looked with disdain and contempt upon the common herd who thought of Jesus as being the Word (Logos) made flesh. In their intellectual arrogance they had advanced to the place where they could see that Jesus was not the Christ. Jesus was human. The Christ was spirit, These two were not the same. They did no deny that Jesus existed nor did they deny that the Christ existed. They did not even deny that for a period the two had been invested in the same person. But they did deny that Jesus was the Christ or that the Christ was Jesus. Jesus was not the word (Logos) and had no existence prior to the incarnation, as they viewed it. Therefore there was no incarnation. Jesus did not come in the flesh.
The apostolic declaration was that Jesus had come in the flesh. This was basic, elemental and fundamental. The spirit which confessed this was of God; the spirit that did not confess it was not of God, but was antichrist. This was the test proposed by which to try the spirits whether they are of God (1Jn. 4:1-3). This was the foundation. One who was on that foundation might be mistaken about many things and all of them were, but they dare not be mistaken about the foundation. It is noteworthy that one was built upon this foundation by a positive actionconfession that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh (1Jn. 4:2). The opposite is not denial, which is also a positive action, but simply not confessing. Every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus is come in the flesh is not of God. This eliminates not only positive denial, but also neutrality. One cannot occupy a neutral position as to the identity of Christ and be built upon the foundation. The foundational fact must be confessedas a fact! One cannot be either a gnostic or an agnostic.
6. We can determine what the doctrine of Christ is in this sense by the effect of going beyond or abiding in it. One who advances has not God; one who abides in it has both the Father and Son. The doctrine of Christ, in this case, does not consist of the things Jesus taught, but of the thing taught about Jesus. The ethical and moral values of Jesus are very important. Nothing we say here must be understood as minimizing their value. One must keep the commandments of Jesus (Joh. 15:10), and if he loves Jesus, he will keep them, naturally, automatically and spontaneously, for this is the only possible reaction of love. Only one who does not love Jesus will not keep his sayings (Joh. 14:24). Yet we must all, without exception, place some qualification upon living up to the requirements of Jesus. As far as we are able, to the extent we understand them, as we learn what he wishes,these are all our own qualifications to explain how we can have God, and how He can have us, while we fail to live up to His perfect example. We often transgress, and often disobey. If we did not the Father would not need to administer chastisement. Yet we are told that all of us are partakers of such chastisement, and without this we would but demonstrate that we are bastards, and not sons.
But the doctrine of Christ about which John wrote cannot be qualified. It cannot be governed by mitigating circumstances. One who does not abide in it has not God. It is just that plain. It is just that positive. What is the doctrine one must have in order to have God? Whatever it is, it was possessed by all who have God while the apostles were still alive. It was possessed by the lady and her children and by all others who are in the truth. It could not have been a copy of the new covenant scriptures, for no person on earth possessed that, not even the apostle John. It could not have included the Second Epistle of John for those to whom it was written were already walking in truth before John wrote it. This epistle could not have been part of the doctrine of Christ for there were those who had already gone beyond that doctrine when this epistle was written.
Fortunately John identifies the doctrine essential to having the Father and the Son. Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ. . . . No one who denies the Son has the Father. He who confesses the Son has the Father also (1Jn. 2:23). Jesus is the Christ! This is the foundation of the community of saints, the colony of heaven on earth. Jesus is the Christ! This is the only confession we may scripturally require of any penitent seeking admission to the fellowship of the redeemed. Jesus is the Christ! Every spirit which confesses this is of God. Jesus is the Christ! This is the only creed essential to overcoming the world. Jesus is the Christ! The one who believes this has the witness in himself.
But what of the advanced thinker who denies this great fact? How was the Gnostic teacher to be treated? How was one who did not abide in this doctrine to be regarded by those who did abide in it?
Receive Him Not
7. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed; for he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds (2Jn. 1:10-11).
Do not receive him into the house or give him any greeting, for he who greets him shares his wicked work (Revised Standard Version).
If any one who comes to you does not bring this teaching, do not receive him under your roof nor greet him; for he who greets him is a sharer of his evil deeds (Weymouth).
If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not admit him to the housedo not even greet him, for he who greets him shares in his wicked work (Moffatt).
If anyone comes to you who does not bring this doctrine, do not welcome him into your house or give him a greeting; for anyone who gives him a greeting is an accomplice in his wicked deeds (New English Version).
If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your homes, do not even bid him welcome; for he who bids him welcome shares in his evil deeds (Authentic Version).
In the face of what has gone before, I would not presume upon the intelligence of my readers to further identify the doctrine. Only those who ignore background, setting, contemporary issues and context, could ever mistake it. The application to other matters could only be made by those with a party axe to grindthose who would fasten upon the phrase receive him not, to deny their relationship with the very brethren whom Jesus taught us to love. The warping and wrestling of this scripture by factional defenders should serve as a warning to us of what happens to those whose hearts are filled with the party spirit and who search the scriptures for a means to separate and segregate themselves from other brethren in the Lord.
Inconsistency of Orthodoxy
I have heard the expression this doctrine applied to every item of controversy among the various factions calling themselves The Church of Christ. Depending upon the particular party whose champion quoted it, the expression has been related to individual cups, Bible classes, colleges, orphan homes, the pastor system, fermented wine in the Lords Supper, a method of breaking the bread, the pre-millennial viewpoint, instrumental music, missionary societies, and a diversified host of motley issues which have made the restoration robe of righteousness a Josephs coat that puts the rainbow spectrum to shame.
In every instance these partisan exponents have shown themselves to be utterly inconsistent. They have slashed themselves with one side of the knife which they have sharpened in eager anticipation of stabbing others. But their very inconsistency proves that each is better than his unwritten creed. These brethren dare not apply practically what they claim to believe. Take for example the preacher who quotes 2Jn. 1:10-11 in condemnation of one who cannot see that instrumental music as an aid in corporate worship is a sin. Does not the one who deplores the use of the instrument receive the other into his houseeither the public meetinghouse or his private dwelling?
The fact is that all of the non-instrumental groups I know, not only receive into their houses those who disagree with them, but go to great lengths to try to get them into their houses. When they hold a meeting they spend money on radio and television programs, as well as newspaper advertising, all beamed at the very ones whom they condemn as bringing not this doctrine. They go from door to door, greeting and saluting all and sundry, and when they find someone who does not agree with their position they urge him to come. They meet him at the door, welcome him warmly, and give him a chief seat in the synagogue. Of course, after the meeting is over at night and the faithful ones remain behind to congratulate themselves upon the success of the personal work and the fact that the Christian Church preacher attended, if one asks if it would have been a sin to call upon the visitor to lead prayer, the evangelist will quote, If any man come and bring not this doctrine receive him not into your house nor give him any greeting.
If 2Jn. 1:10-11, applies to a Christian Church preacher as my factional brethren so childishly designate those who use instrumental music, I charge that to even allow him to enter the house (much less invite him to come), makes them accomplices in his evil deeds. It is such absurd, ridiculous and puerile reasoning which will keep thinking people from seeing the real force and beauty of a plea which began as a project to unite the Christians in all of the sects. The very essence of sectarianism is exclusiveness, and if anyone is more exclusive than those who twist this scripture to justify their sectarian prejudices I have yet to meet him. Our brethren should be ashamed to live and afraid to die!
Every party among us, even the most reactionary, will greet any person who attends their meetingsafter they get over their surprise. Of course they would not call upon him to pray to the Father but they will run halfway across the house to provide him with a songbook already turned to the right page, so he can praise the Father. He cannot pray out loud by himself, but he can pray as loud as he wants with others, if the prayer is set to a tune. I am thankful that literally hundreds of our brethren are becoming embarrassed by the imbecility and senselessness of the preposterous position in which they find themselves. The party spirit has driven them so far down a blind alley that at last some are trying to scale the fence at the other end and get back on Main Street again. This is good and I intend to give them a hand when I can.
My Position
I propose to regard all of Gods children as my brothers. I intend to treat them as brothers. I have resolved to make nothing a test of fellowship which God has not made a condition of salvation. I shall accuse no one of being an antichrist who is built upon the one foundation simply because he differs with me in understanding of such things as cups, classes, colleges, the millennium, or instrumental music. I shall not allow our divergent views upon these things to keep me from associating with any of my brothers, or helping all of them.
I shall go visit any group to share what I have learned, and to share in what they have learned. I shall go with none of them in partisan alliance, for my allegiance is to Jesus Christ. I am joined to Him and through Him to all others who are joined unto Him. Never again will I be a champion of any party, faction or clique. I refuse to be affiliated with any clan in which my love for these precludes my love for those, I belong to nobody and no body but the body of Christ!
Under no circumstances will I apply to those who believe that Jesus is the Christ, those passages written to condemn those who do not confess this fact. My brethren are not Gnostics. They have not gone out from us even though we differ about many issues which have disturbed our tranquility. When brethren come where I am speaking, I shall not seek to determine how they stand on instrumental music, the millennium, or Herald of Truth, before I call upon them to pray. These are matters between them and our Lord. If they can explain their position to his satisfaction, they need not try to satisfy me with their explanation. I am not so much interested in where they stand as I am in the direction they are facing. I shall recognize their right to pray because they are in Him and not because they are in some party. I have no party and no party has me! This last is even more important than the other. I know a lot of brethren who claim to have no faction, but a faction has a claim upon them. They stand in jeopardy every hour!
Upon the one foundation living stones are builded together. These stones are not all the same size, shape, texture or variety. A stone house must be built with the stones available in the area. Since stones vary from one area to another, a house in one location may not look like that in another. The house of God is not made of stones that are uniform in knowledge, perception, ability or aptitude. It is composed of those who are joined together by mutual faith in Jesus and cemented by love. The foundation for all is the eternal abiding principle in confessional form, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. If any man come and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, and give him no greeting.
RELIGIOUS HATRED
BY FREDERIC W. FARRAR, D.D., F.R.S.
(Editors Note: After preparing the foregoing article I decided that our readers should hear from one capable of a more scholarly approach. I append this chapter from The Early Days of Christianity by Dr. Farrar, who was at the time Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge; Archdeacon and Canon of Westminster; and Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen. He deals with 2Jn. 1:10-11. We ask that you read it carefully.)
It will be seen, then, at a glance, that Truth and Love are keynotes of the Epistle, and that the conceptions which prevail throughout it are those with which we have been made familiar by the previous Epistle. And yet one passage of the Epistle has again and again been belauded, and is again and again adduced as a stronghold of intolerance, an excuse
for pitiless hostility against all who differ from ourselves. There is something distressing in the swift instinct with which an unchristian egotism has first assumed its own infallibility on subjects which are often no part of Christian faith, and then has spread as on vultures wings to this passage as a consecration of the feelings with which the odium theologicum disgraces and ruins the Divinest interests of the cause of Christ. It must be saidthough I say it with deepest sorrowthat the cold exclusiveness of the Pharisee, the bitter ignorance of the self-styled theologian, the usurped infallibility of the half-educated religionist, have ever been the curse of Christianity.
They have imposed the senses of men upon the words of God, the special senses of men on the general words of God, and have tried to enforce them on mens consciences with all kinds of burnings and anathemas, under equal threats of death and damnation. And thus they have incurred the terrible responsibility of presenting religion to mankind in a false and repellent guise. Is theological hatred still to be a proverb for the worlds just contempt? Is such hatredhatred in its bitterest and most ruthless formto be regarded as the legitimate and normal outcome of the religion of love? Is the spirit of peace never to be brought to bear on religious opinions? Are such questions always to excite the most intense animosities and the most terrible divisions?
Is the Diotrephes of each little religious clique to be the ideal of a Christian character? Is it in religious discussions alone that impartiality is to be set down as weakness, and courtesy as treason? Is it among those only who pride themselves on being orthodox that there is to be the completest absence of humility and justice? Is the world to be for ever confirmed in its opinion that theological partisans are less truthful, less candid, less high-minded, less honorable even than the partisans of political and social causes who make no profession as to the duty of love? Are the so-called religious champions to be for ever, as they now are, in many instances, the most unscrupulously bitter and the most conspicuously unfair? Alas! they might be with far less danger to the cause of religion if they would forego the luxury of quoting Scripture for their purpose.
If this passage of St. John had indeed authorized such errors and excessesif it had indeed been a proof, as has been said, of the deplorable growth of dogmatic intoleranceit would have been hard to separate it from the old spirit of rigorism and passion which led the Apostle, in his most undeveloped days, to incur his Lords rebuke, by proclaiming his jealousy of those who worked on different lines from his own, and by wishing to call down fire to consume the rude villagers of Samaria. It would have required some ingenuity not to see in it the same sort of impatient and unworthy intolerance which once marked his impetuous outbursts, but which is (I trust falsely) attributed to him in the silly story of Cerinthus and the bath. In that case also the spirit of his advice would have been widely different from the spirit which actuated the merciful tolerance of the Lord to Heathens, the Samaritans, to Sadducees, and even to Pharisees. It would have been in direct antagonism to our Lords command to the Twelve to salute with their blessing every house to which they came, because if it were not worthy their peace would return to them again. It would have been alien from many of the noblest lessons of the New Testament. It would practically have excluded from the bosom of Christianity, and of Christianity alone, the highest workings of the universal law of love. It would have been in glaring disaccord with the gentleness and moderation which is now shown, even towards absolute believers, by the wisest, gentlest, and most Christ-like of Gods saints. If it really bore the sense which has been assigned to it, it would be a grave reason for sharing the ancient doubts respecting the genuiness of the little letter in which it occurs, and for coming to the conclusion that, while its general sentiments were borrowed from the authentic works of St. John, they had only been thrown together for the purpose of introducing under the sanction of his name, a precept of unchristian harshness and religious intolerance.
But there is too much reason to fear that to the end of time the conceit of orthodoxism will claim inspired authority for its own conclusions, even when they are most antichristian, and will build up systems of exclusive hatred out of inferences purely unwarrantable. It is certain, too, that each sect is always tempted to be proudest of its most sectarian peculiarities; that each form of dissent, whether in or out of the body of the Established Churches, most idolizes its own dissidence. The aim of religious opinionativeness always has been, and always will be, to regard its narrowest conclusions as matters of faith, and to exclude or excommunicate all those who reject or modify them. The sort of syllogisms used by these enemies of the love of Christ are much as follows
My opinions are founded on interpretations of Scripture. Scripture is infallible. My views of its meaning are infallible too. Your opinions and inferences differ from mine, therefore you must be in the wrong. All wrong opinions are capable of so many ramifications that any one who differs from me in minor points must be unsound in vital matters also. Therefore all who differ from me and my clique are heretics. All heresy is wicked. All heretics are necessarily wicked men. It is my religious duty to hate, calumniate and abuse you.
Those who have gone thus far in elevating hatred into a Christian virtue ought logically to go a little farther. They generally do so when they have the power. They do not openly say, Let us venerate the examples of Arnold of Citeaux, and of Torquemada. Let us glorify the Crusaders at Beziers. Let us revive the racks and thumbscrews of the Inquisition. Let us, with the Pope, strike medals in honor of the massacre of St. Bartholomew. Let us re-establish the Star Chamber and entrust those ecclesiastics who hold our opinions with powers of torture. But since they are robbed of these means of securing unanimitysince they can no longer even imprison dissenting tinkers like Bunyan, and regicide Arians like Miltonthey are too apt to indulge in the party spirit which can employ slander though it is robbed of the thumbscrew, and revel in depreciation though it may no longer avail itself of the fagot and the rack.
The tender mercies of contending religionists are exceptionally cruel, The men who, in the Corinthian party-sense, boast I am of Christ, do not often, in these days, formulate the defence of their lack of charity so clearly as this. But they continually act and write in this spirit. Long experience has made mankind familiar with the base ingenuity which frames charges of constructive heresy out of the most innocent opinions; which insinuates that variations from the vulgar exegesis furnish a sufficient excuse for banding anathemas, under the plea that they are an implicit denial of Christ! Had there been in Scripture any sanction for this execrable spirit of heresy-hunting Pharisaism, Christian theology would only become another name for the collisions of wrangling sects, all cordially hating each other, and only kept together by common repulsion against external enmity. But, to me at least, it seems that the world has never developed a more unchristian and antichrist phenomenon than the conduct of those who encourage the bitterest excesses of hatred under the profession of Christian love. I know nothing so profoundly irreligious as the narrow intolerance of an ignorant dogmatism. Had there been anything in this passage which sanctioned so odious a spirit, I could not have believed that it emanated from St. John. A good tree does not bring forth corrupt fruit. The sweet fountain of Christianity cannot send forth the salt and bitter water of fierceness and hate. The Apostle of love would have belied all that is best in his own teaching if he had consciously given an absolution, nay, an incentive, to furious intolerance. The last words of Christian revelation could never have meant what these words have been interpreted to meannamely, Hate, exclude, anathematize, persecute, treat as enemies and opponents to be crushed and insulted, those who differ from you in religious opinions. Those who have pretended a Scriptural sanction for such Cain-like religionism have generally put their theories into practice against men who have been infinitely more in the right, and transcendently nearer God, than those who, in killing or injuring them, ignorantly thought they were doing God service.
Meanwhile this incidental expression of St. Johns brief letter will not lend itself to these gross perversions. What St. John really says, and really means, is something wholly different. False teachers were rife, who, professing to be Christians, robbed the nature of Christ of all which gave its efficacy to the Atonement, and its significance to the Incarnation. These teachers, like other Christian missionaries, travelled from city to city, and, in the absence of public inns, were received into the houses of Christian converts. The Christian lady to whom John writes is warned that, if she offers her hospitality to these dangerous emissaries who were subverting the central truth of Christianity, she is expressing a public sanction of them; and, by doing this and offering them her best wishes she is taking a direct share in the harm they do. This is common sense; nor is there any thing uncharitable about it.
No one is bound to help forward the dissemination of teaching what he regards as erroneous respecting the most essential doctrines of his own faith. Still less would it have been right to do this in the days when Christian communities were so small and weak. But to interpret this as it has in all ages been practically interpretedto pervert it into a sort of command to exaggerate the minor variations between religious opinions, and to persecute those whose views differ from our ownto make our own opinions the exclusive test of heresy, and to say with Cornelius a Lapide, that this verse reprobates all conversation, all intercourse, all dealings with hereticsis to interpret Scripture by the glare of partisanship and self-satisfaction, not to read it under the light of holy love.
Alas! churchmen and theologians have found it a far more easy and agreeable matter to obey their distortion of this supposed command, and even to push its stringency to the very farthest limits, than to obey the command that we should love one another! From the Tree of delusive knowledge they pluck the poisonous and inflating fruits of pride and hatred, while they suffer the fruits of love and meekness to fall neglected from the Tree of Life. The popularity which these verses still enjoy and the exaggerated misinterpretation still attached to them, are due to the fact that they are so acceptable to the arrogance and selfishness, the dishonesty and tyranny, the sloth and obstinacy, of that bitter spirit of religious discord which has been the disgrace of the Church and the scandal of the world.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
Reasons for this beseech the widespread of the errorists, 2Jn 1:7-11.
The main purpose of the epistle now discloses itself to warn the faithful lady and her children against the Gnostic deceivers, who were teaching a phantasm Christ.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
7. Deceivers Leaders into antichristian error.
Are entered into The better reading is, have gone out: as if the deceivers issued from some common hive or from some common teacher or school of error.
Into the world From their headquarters into the broad public world.
An antichrist Note on 1Jn 2:18. According to St. John’s use here of the word, an antichrist signifies any emissary from the hive of antichristian leaders.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘For many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even those who do not confess that Jesus Christ comes in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.’
Mention is now made of those whom they should guard against, the deceivers, those who deny that Jesus the Christ came in the flesh as a human being. These are the deceivers and the antichrist (1Jn 2:18-21). They set up someone else as the Christ in the place of Jesus, a Christ who did not come as true human and die on the cross, and thereby they seek to deceive true believers. In our day this is partly true of Islam, who reduce Jesus, even though they call Him Messiah, and deny His death. And they may well prove to produce the final Antichrist. And one of the ways by which they are known is that they do not love the Son, do not love the truth as it is in Jesus, do not love His commandments, and do not love His true people.
Note that these deceivers have gone forth into ‘the world’ in contrast with the church. They have withdrawn from the true fellowship of the people of God. ‘They went out from us because they were not of us’ (1Jn 2:19).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Warning of Anti-Christ In 2Jn 1:7-11 John warns his reader(s) about the anti-christ.
2Jn 1:7 Comments – It is obvious that John was dealing with the same issue in his first epistles. Note a similar comment.
1Jn 4:2, “Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:”
2Jn 1:10-11 Comments John’s Zeal for His Children – This harsh tone reveals the burning zeal that John had for his “children,” the churches of Asia Minor that he was overseeing.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Warning against false teachers
v. 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 anti-Christ.
v. 8. Look to yourselves that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.
v. 9. Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
v. 10. If there come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God- speed;
v. 11. for he that biddeth him God- speed is partaker of his evil deeds. Here the warnings of the longer letter are summarized: Because many deceivers went forth into the world that do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh; this is the deceiver and the anti-Christ. These words are addressed to the entire family to whom this letter was sent, and give the reason why they should obey the old commandment, namely, because seducers are at work, men who were acquainted with the Gospel-truth, but deliberately denied it and went forth with the intention of deceiving souls. The principal heresy of the deceivers, the foundation of all their anti-Christian teaching, was this, that they denied Jesus Christ, the Son of God incarnate, the Savior of the world. So each and every one of them was, in truth, a deceiver and an anti-Christ; every one of them was busily engaged in attempting to dethrone Christ.
The apostle’s warning, therefore, is specific and personal. Look to yourselves, lest you lose what you have worked for, but rather receive a full reward. We Christians must ever be on our guard and hold fast that which we have. The treasure of our faith, although given us without any merit or worthiness on our part, causes us many an hour of tribulation and battle; it is too precious to lose lightly. We must cling to our Christian belief, and all that it includes, with all the power at our command. For only if we are faithful to the end, shall we receive, as a merciful reward, the crown of life, Rev 2:10. That, indeed, is a full, a wonderful reward, the bliss of everlasting salvation before the face of the Lord. There certainly is danger in taking up with false teaching and risking the loss of the Gospel’s comfort: Everything that is “progressive” and does not remain in the doctrine of Christ has not God; he that remains in the doctrine, this one has both the Father and the Son. The false teachers of Asia Minor were fond of boasting that they alone were progressive, advanced thinkers; they alone were making the Gospel fit new situations, just as the false prophets of our day are always advertising, with a pitying side glance at the poor benighted Bible Christians that still cling to its doctrines of sin and grace. The old teaching of Christ, of salvation through His blood, had been set aside by them as not agreeing with the demands of an enlightened people. But St. John’s judgment upon such teachers is short: They have not God. Every one to this day and hour that denies the manifestation of the Father in the Son for the salvation of the world by His suffering and death thereby denies the true, revealed God. No teaching is true, no teaching has a right to exist, which eliminates the redemption or obscures the glory of the Cross. On the other hand, every teacher, ‘every believer that clings to that old doctrine of salvation through the blood of Christ, to the fact that God the Father sent His Son into the world that men should live through Him, has both the Father and the Son, is united with them by the bonds of the closest union, in faith.
There was need of caution in those days: If any one comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into the house, and do not greet him, for he that greets him becomes a partaker of his wicked works. There was need of such caution and discrimination in receiving the receiving “apostles and prophets” of those days, who not only went from congregation to congregation, but also from house to house, trying to gain adherents for their false doctrines. St. John, therefore, gives the very good rule and precept that such people should be forbidden the house and that no one should wish them good luck in their undertaking, wish them well in their work. To this day the wandering preachers that are trying to gain proselytes for their false teaching should be treated in the same way: they should be refused admittance to the houses and should certainly not receive our good wishes in their evil work. But to carry this admonition out to such an extent as to deny even a civil greeting or the courtesies of charity to members of a false church is to transgress against other passages of Scriptures, such as Mat 5:43-48; Gal 6:10.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
2Jn 1:7. For many deceivers “I exhort you to walk in the truth, and keep the commandment which you have had from the beginning, because many deceivers are gone out into the world, who, by their novel doctrine, pervert the truth, and render the old commandment of none effect, &c.” All the sentiments and phrases in this verse are found in the first epistle.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
2Jn 1:7 . In this verse the apostle addresses himself to the warning against the false teachers, whom he first more particularly characterizes. The , with which the verse begins, indicates that the foregoing exhortation to mutual love has its origin in the fear of their being disturbed by the influence of the false teachers; but it is not to be inferred from this that is grammatically dependent on . It would be grammatically possible also to regard this verse as the premiss on which 2Jn 1:8 is based (Grotius, Carpzovius), but such a construction is at variance with the peculiarity of John’s diction.
] The expression does not elsewhere appear in John; comp. on the other hand, Mat 27:63 ; 2Co 6:8 ; 1Ti 4:1 ; instead of it in 1Jn 2:26 : .
With this passage may be compared 1Jn 2:18 ff; 1Jn 4:1 .
[ ] does not denote separation from the Church; does not here form the antithesis of the ; the sense is rather the same here as in Joh 4:1 . The difference between . and . is only this, that by the latter expression the point of departure is more definitely indicated.
. . .] comp. 1Jn 4:2-3 ; on the N. T. usage of the article before the participle after , comp. Buttm. p. 254; = . The is not to be explained, with Winer (p. 428; VII. p. 450), by the fact that the participle refers to a representative class (= quicumque non profitentur), but it is used just as in 1Jn 4:3 : ; see on this passage.
] is to be taken just as the words 1Jn 4:2 , that run almost exactly similarly. The present participle , instead of which is used there, expresses the idea in itself apart from the idea of time; comp. Joh 6:14 ; Bengel incorrectly: qui veniebat, with an appeal to 3Jn 1:3 , for in this passage and , by their close connection with , are distinctly indicated as imperfect participles; such a connection does not exist here, nor are we to interpret, with Baumgarten-Crusius: “He who was to come;” still more incorrectly Oecumenius takes it as future participle, referring it to the second coming of Christ.
] refers back to . . . By the apostle resumes the preceding ; by he adds a new characteristic.
The definite article indicates these ideas as familiar to the readers; the Antichrist of whom they have heard, comp. 1Jn 2:18 .
The singular is here used in collective signification (Lcke); the many are the Antichrist, inasmuch as the same is in all; comp. further, the remarks on 1Jn 2:18 .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
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. (8) Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. (9) Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. (10) If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: (11) For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds. (12) Having many things to write unto you, I would not write with paper and ink: but I trust to come unto you, and speak face to face, that our joy may be full. (13) The children of thy elect sister greet thee. Amen.
There is nothing here which can need a comment, the whole being so very plain and obvious. They shew the affectionate mind of the Apostle, in watching over the Church; and they no less teach how very early the heresies sprung up among the people. Very painful must it have been to the hoary Apostle, who had lain in Jesus’s bosom, to live long enough to see men arise who dared to deny that Jesus Christ had come in the flesh. But, Reader! Had John lived to our day, or could he have beheld the infidelity, which we are vexed with, what judgments would he not teach the Church they might expect to follow? Not the true Church, however, for this is everlastingly and eternally safe; but the professing Church, who have frittered away all that is truly valuable in the Gospel of Christ, and left nothing to it but the mere name of Christian.
The Apostle very sweetly closeth the Epistle with the greetings from one branch of the Lord’s chosen family to another!
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
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.
Ver. 7. For many deceivers ] Gr. , cheaters, cozeners, (deceivers) such as can cog a a die to deceive the unskilful, Eph 4:14 , cast a mist to delude even the quick sighted.
Are entered into the world ] Where the Church also sojourneth, as the unclean beasts were together with the clean in Noah’s ark; or as Esau was in the same womb and afterwards in the same family with Jacob; or as thieves lodge in the same inn with true men, who should therefore be sober and watch. Mundus Medaea est Iasonis, hoc est Satanae sponsa. (Aretius.) The world is the spouse of Satan, and yet the godly must lie as it were in the lap of this Delilah. Let Samson look to his locks.
a The act of cogging or cheating at dice; a particular method or way of doing this. In quot. 1598, taken by some to mean ‘false dice for cogging’; but it is coupled with ‘devices’ and ‘shifts’. Obs. D
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
7 .] The condition of Love is Truth, see 2Jn 1:3 . And the necessity of fresh exhortation to walk in love, in that love whose condition is truth, lies in the fact that there are many deceivers gone forth, denying the Truth: of whom we are to beware, and not, by extending to them a spurious sympathy, to become partakers with them. Because (see above. cannot be referred to , 2Jn 1:8 , for its apodosis, as is done by Grot., Carpzov., J. Lange, as this would involve a length of protasis, broken by a parenthetical clause, . . ., quite alien from St. John’s style. Nor can we well understand with Bengel, “ratio cur jubeat retinere audita a principio:” because the foregoing is not a command “retinere audita a principio;” this latter particular being only introduced by the way, not as a principal feature) many deceivers (makers to wander, see reff.) went forth (here probably, on account of the aor., “from us,” as in 1Jn 2:19 . In 1Jn 4:1 , it is perf., , where I have preferred the sense, “are gone forth from him who sent them,” viz. the evil one. Huther prefers this latter sense here also) into the world (namely) they who confess not (instead of , the Apostle writes , thereby not merely characterizing the as not confessing &c., but absolutely identifying all who repudiate the confession which follows, as belonging to the class of . The subjective is the necessary consequence of such an arrangement, involving an hypothesis within the limits of the relative , the repudiation of the confession: see 1Jn 4:3 , note) Jesus Christ coming in ( the ) flesh ( , altogether timeless, and representing the great truth of the Incarnation itself, as distinguished from its historical manifestation ( , 1Jn 5:6 ), and from the abiding effect of that historical manifestation ( , 1Jn 4:2 ): and all three, as confessions of the Person , distinguished from the accus. with infin. construction: see note on 1Jn 4:2 . He who denies the , denies the possibility of the Incarnation: he who denies the or , denies its actuality . Other interpretations, such as that of c., , , , , that of Erasm., Schlicht., Bengel, “ qui veniebat ,” and of Baumg.-Crus., “ who was to come ,” are beside the mark). This (viz., “he that fulfils the above character.” No supply, such as , c., is needed. See the same construction, 1Jn 2:22 ) is the deceiver and the antichrist (see notes on 1Jn 2:18 ; 1Jn 2:22 , as to the personal relation of these to the one great Antichrist of prophecy. The , pointing to a class, makes each one of these, in his place, a representative and “prcursor Antichristi”).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
2Jn 1:7-8 . A Warning against Heretical Teaching. “Because many deceivers went forth into the world even they that confess not Jesus as Christ coming in flesh. This is the deceiver and the Antichrist. Look to yourselves, that ye may not lose what we wrought, but receive a full wage.”
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
2Jn 1:7 . explaining : “I ask you to obey the old commandment because seducers are at work”. , see note on 1Jn 4:1 . , a definite and well-known sect. See note on 1Jn 2:4 . (1Jn 4:2 ) of the Advent, of the continous manifestation of the incarnate Christ. Cf. Joh 1:14 , where corresponds to and to .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: 2Jn 1:7-11
7For may deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist. 8Watch yourselves, that you do not lose what we have accomplished, but that you may receive a full reward. 9Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teachings of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son. 10If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; 11for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds.
2Jn 1:7 “For many deceivers” The word “deceivers” comes from the Greek word plan, from which we get the English term “planet.” In the ancient world the movement of the heavenly bodies was mapped and studied (zodiak). The stars fit into stable patterns, but some stars (i.e., planets) moved irregularly. The ancients called them “wanderers.” This developed metaphorically into those who wander from the truth.
These false teachers are not just sincerely wrong or misled persons who are ignorant of the gospel. In John’s writings both the Pharisees and the false teachers rebel against the clear light they have received. This is why their rebellion is characterized as “the unpardonable sin” or “the sin unto death” (see notes at 1Jn 5:16). The tragedy is that they also caused others to follow them to destruction. The NT clearly reveals that false teachers will appear and cause great problems (cf. Mat 7:15; Mat 24:11; Mat 24:24; Mar 13:22; 1Jn 2:26; 1Jn 3:7; 1Jn 4:1).
“have gone out into the world” The world here is simply our physical planet. These false teachers have either left the Christian church (cf. 1Jn 2:19) or they are on missionary assignments (cf. 3 John).
“those who do not acknowledge” This is the term homologe, which implies a public profession and confession of faith in Christ. See SPECIAL TOPIC: Confession at Joh 9:22-23.
“Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh” These deceivers continue in their false teachings about the person of Christ. This verse repeats the admonition to “test the spirits” of 1Jn 4:1-6, especially as they relate to Jesus’ full humanity (cf. Joh 1:14; 1Ti 3:16). Gnosticism affirmed an eternal dualism between “spirit” (God) and “matter” (flesh). To them, Jesus could not be fully God and fully man.
There seems to have been at least two theological streams within early Gnostic thought.
1. denial of Jesus’ humanity (Docetic); He appeared to be human, but was a spirit
2. denial that Christ died on the cross; this group (Cerinthian) asserted that the “Christ spirit” came on the man Jesus at his baptism and left Him before He died on the cross
It is possible that the present tense, “coming in the flesh,” is John’s way of rejecting Cerinthian Gnosticism and 1Jn 4:1-6 is his way of rejecting Docetic Gnosticism.
“This is the deceiver and the antichrist” In 1Jn 2:18 there is a distinction between the plural “antichrists” and the singular “the Antichrist.” The plural had come in John’s day and they had left the churches (cf. 1Jn 2:19), but the singular is projected into the future (see “the man of lawlessness” in 2 Thessalonians 2). However, in this verse, the singular is used, like the plural in 1Jn 2:18-25.
2Jn 1:8 “watch yourselves” This is a Present active imperative. It is the term “see” (blep), used metaphorically for a warning against evil (cf. Mat 24:4; Mar 13:5; Luk 21:8; Act 13:40; 1Co 8:9; 1Co 10:12; Gal 5:12; Heb 12:25). Believers are responsible for discerning error because
1. they know the gospel
2. they have the Spirit
3. they have ongoing fellowship with Christ
NASB”that you do not lose what we have accomplished”
NKJV”that we do not lose those things we worked for”
NRSV”so that you do not lose what we have worked for”
TEV”so that you will not lose what we have worked for”
NJB”or all our work will be lost”
There is a Greek manuscript variation in this verse related to the first pronoun: should it be “you” (NASB, NRSV, TEV) or “we” (NKJV)? The UBS4 text supports “you,” meaning the believers addressed might not accomplish the goals of the gospel given them by the Apostolic witness.
“but that you may receive a full reward” This is an aorist subjunctive which points back to their reception of the gospel. The subjunctive’s contingency is not related to their salvation, but the maturity and expansion of the gospel through them (cf. 1Co 9:27; 1Co 15:10; 1Co 15:14; 1Co 15:58; 2Co 6:1; Gal 2:2; Php 2:16; 1Th 2:1; 1Th 3:5).
2Jn 1:9
NASB”Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ”
NKJV”Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ”
NRSV”Everyone who does not abide in the teaching of Christ”
TEV”Anyone who does not stay with the teaching of Christ, but goes beyond it”
NJB”If anybody does not remain in the teaching of Christ but goes beyond it”
First, notice the negative use of pas. The gospel invitation is to “all,” but unfortunately so also is the potential for heresy. This potential heresy is characterized by two present active participles: “goes beyond” and “does not abide.” The first “going beyond” may have been a catchword for the false teachers’ implying they had advanced truth beyond the eyewitness Apostles. Believers are characterized by the word of truth abiding in them (cf. Joh 8:31; Joh 15:7; 1Jn 2:14, the negative in Joh 5:38; 1Jn 1:10). See Special Topic on Perseverance at Joh 8:31 and Apostasy at Joh 6:64.
The genitive phrase “of Christ” could refer to
1. teachings of Christ
2. teachings about Christ
3. John’s common double meanings
Genitives are numerous and vague! Only context can determine the intended meanings but often, as here, they overlap.
“does not have God” The “teaching of Christ” and the “truth” of 2Jn 1:2 are parallel. False teachers and their followers have no reward (cf. 2Jn 1:8). They are spiritually lost and not with God because to have the Father one must have the Son (cf. 1Jn 5:10-12). The use of the verb “has” (twice, present active indicative) with God is found only here and 1Jn 2:23.
2Jn 1:10 “If” This is a first class conditional sentence assumed to be true from the author’s perspective or for his literary purposes. False teachers will come!
“do not receive him into your house” This is a present active imperative with the negative particle which often implies the stopping of an act in process (the context must determine).
The “house” could refer to Christian hospitality (cf. Mat 25:35; Rom 12:13; 1Ti 3:2; Tit 1:8; Heb 13:2; 1Pe 4:9 or 3Jn 1:5-6), but in context it probably refers to inviting a traveling minister to speak to the house church (cf. Rom 16:5; 1Co 16:19; Col 4:15; Phm 1:2).
“and do not give him a greeting” This is another present active imperative with the negative particle. Do not identify yourself with this “so-called Christian.” Any hint of fellowship might be misunderstood as approval (cf. 2Jn 1:11). This statement is very hard to apply to today. So many claim to be Christians. Yet in an attempt to share with them we must be cordial and engaging in conversation. Still, Christian leaders must beware of any identification with heresy. This, of course, does not apply to Christian denominations!
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
deceivers. Greek. planos. See 2Co 6:8. Compare 1Jn 4:1.
world. App-129.
that, &c. Literally Jesus Christ coming in the flesh. The present participle is used, as in Rev 1:4. In 1Jn 4:2, 1Jn 4:3, the perfect is used, referring to His first coming. This refers to His second coming. Compare Act 1:11.
a, an = the.
antichrist. See 1Jn 2:18.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
7.] The condition of Love is Truth, see 2Jn 1:3. And the necessity of fresh exhortation to walk in love, in that love whose condition is truth, lies in the fact that there are many deceivers gone forth, denying the Truth: of whom we are to beware, and not, by extending to them a spurious sympathy, to become partakers with them. Because (see above. cannot be referred to , 2Jn 1:8, for its apodosis, as is done by Grot., Carpzov., J. Lange, as this would involve a length of protasis, broken by a parenthetical clause, …, quite alien from St. Johns style. Nor can we well understand with Bengel, ratio cur jubeat retinere audita a principio: because the foregoing is not a command retinere audita a principio; this latter particular being only introduced by the way, not as a principal feature) many deceivers (makers to wander, see reff.) went forth (here probably, on account of the aor., from us, as in 1Jn 2:19. In 1Jn 4:1, it is perf., , where I have preferred the sense, are gone forth from him who sent them, viz. the evil one. Huther prefers this latter sense here also) into the world (namely) they who confess not (instead of , the Apostle writes , thereby not merely characterizing the as not confessing &c., but absolutely identifying all who repudiate the confession which follows, as belonging to the class of . The subjective is the necessary consequence of such an arrangement, involving an hypothesis within the limits of the relative ,-the repudiation of the confession: see 1Jn 4:3, note) Jesus Christ coming in (the) flesh (, altogether timeless, and representing the great truth of the Incarnation itself, as distinguished from its historical manifestation (, 1Jn 5:6), and from the abiding effect of that historical manifestation (, 1Jn 4:2): and all three, as confessions of the Person , distinguished from the accus. with infin. construction: see note on 1Jn 4:2. He who denies the , denies the possibility of the Incarnation: he who denies the or , denies its actuality. Other interpretations, such as that of c., , , , , that of Erasm., Schlicht., Bengel,-qui veniebat, and of Baumg.-Crus., who was to come, are beside the mark). This (viz., he that fulfils the above character. No supply, such as , c., is needed. See the same construction, 1Jn 2:22) is the deceiver and the antichrist (see notes on 1Jn 2:18; 1Jn 2:22, as to the personal relation of these to the one great Antichrist of prophecy. The , pointing to a class, makes each one of these, in his place, a representative and prcursor Antichristi).
Fuente: The Greek Testament
2Jn 1:7. , because) The reason why he bids them keep the things which they have heard from the beginning.-, many) 1Jn 2:18; 1Jn 4:1.-) have entered. The world is averse from God and Christ, busily intent upon its own husks: but to oppose God and Christ is of the leaven of Satan.-, who came) Thus , 3Jn 1:3. Comp. , who is come, 1Jn 4:2.- , this is) A gradation. This very person is the character of a great impostor and antichrist. No other of a more dreadful appearance is to be sought.-, a seducer) opposed to God.-, antichrist) opposed to Christ. The warning against antichrist belongs even to women and young men: 1Jn 1:4-5. Antichrist denies the Father and the Son; and does not confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
2Jn 1:7-11
WARNINGS
(2Jn 1:7-11)
7 For many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even they that confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh.–The preposition “for,” with which this verse begins, obviously links the thought which it contains with that which immediately precedes. The meaning, expanded, runs, It is imperative that you be joined together in love and allow this love to issue in Christian conduct, always keeping the commandments which have been given. To do so is to erect the strongest possible barriers against error. That there is an ever-present threat of it is obvious from the fact that many deceivers are gone forth into the world. The word “deceiv-ers” (planoi) suggests the idea of wanderers, rovers, moving about for the purpose of seducing and leading astray those whom they induce to accept their teaching. (Cf. 1Ti 4:1 ff.) These de-ceivers had gone forth as roving bands, their motive being to de-ceive, delude, lead- the saints away from the faith. The fact that some were said to have gone forth from the disciples (1 John 2 18) establishes the presumption that these here referred to may have been the apostates there described, though the verb “gone forth” may mean no more than that they regarded the world as the field in which to propagate their doctrine, and were thus industriously extending their efforts.
These deceivers were those who “confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh.” To “confess not” is the equivalent of deny-ing that Jesus had come in the flesh, and this they were doing. “Cometh” is translated from a present participle in the original text, and reveals that the apostle regarded the incarnation as a continu-ing fact, the denial of which made one a deceiver and false teacher. John did not mean by this that Jesus was yet in the flesh; though in his glorified state when these words were penned, the truth of the incarnation yet remained, and shall ever do so, and to deny it is to repudiate the truth. Judaism denied that Jesus had come in the flesh; Gnosticism, the current heresy of the time when John wrote, denied that he could come in the flesh. Either doctrine was heretical, and the propagators thereof deceivers.
This is the deceiver and the anti-Christ.–For the characteristics and identity of the anti-Christ, see the comments on 1Jn 2:18; 1Jn 2:22; 1Jn 4:3. In the text here, as in the passages in which the term anti-Christ occurs, it will be seen that the apostles sometimes refers to many anti-christs, and again to but one. The great anti-christ was the symbol, the representative of the class whose spirit, disposition, design the others adopted. The anti-Christ is the head of the apostate church–the church of Rome–and all who teach false doctrine, however much they may differ in detail in their teaching, or oppose one another in their actions, are one in their opposition to the Lord and the cause for which he died. Of what consequence is it that men array themselves against each other in minor details when together they form a solid phalanx against the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ our Lord? How quickly do men resolve their differences of a denominational nature when they are confronted with a genuine representative of the truth! The denominational world has ever recognized the church of the Lord as a common enemy; and where it is active, they have disregarded their own distinctive interests to form a common front against the truth. The spirit of the anti-Christ is the motivating factor in every false teacher.
8 Look to yourselves, that ye lose not the things which we have wrought, but that ye receive a full reward.–“Look to yourselves,” i.e., take an introspective view into your own hearts and test the defences which you have against such in order that you may be sure you will not succumb to the allurements of these teachers and so lose the things wrought out by the apostles. That which was wrought out by the apostles was the gospel delivered through them by means of the Holy Spirit to the people to whom they preached. Taught here in emphatic fashion is, (1) the possi-bility of apostasy; (2) the importance of constant and careful self-examination (3) the vital necessity of ceaseless vigilance against the blandishments of the evil one. That which this faithful sister stood in danger of losing was the most priceless possession she had: the salvation of her soul. The admonition is equally applic-able to us today. Our first and paramount concern should be our own standing before God, and this is to be maintained only by an unswerving adherence to his will and way as taught in the scrip-tures. Any threat thereto, such as these false teachers posed, should be rejected speedily and permanently.
9 Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ, bath not God:–Verse 8, immediately preceding this, warns of the loss to be sustained in listening to the false teachers and “deceivers” mentioned in verse 7. Here, the loss is identified and explained: it is the loss of God himself! Whosoever goes onward and abides not in the teaching of Christ “hath not God!” The verbs “goeth onward” and “abideth not” are descriptive of the same act:the first presents it positively, the second, negatively. The “teaching of Christ” here is not teaching about Christ, or teaching which is Christian in substance or nature; it is the teaching which Christ did personally and through those whom he inspired. It is the teaching of Christ, because he is, in the final analysis, its author, and from him it issued. It is thus an infallible standard, and no deviation from it is possible without apostasy.
To go onward and not abide in this teaching is to lose God. The verb “goeth onward” is from the Greek proago, to progress. The meaning thus is: Whosoever becomes progressive and abides not in the teaching of Christ hath not God. Men often boast that they are progressive, and movements religious have arisen both in and out of the church through the years whose watchword and slogan was progressiveness. Progress is good only when it is in the direction of Christ, and not away from him; and in some matters it is far preferable to be non-progressive, particularly in not going beyond what the Lord has said. Any movement which is away from the teaching of Christ is progress in the wrong direc-tion, and results eventually in the loss of God himself. The price of a sound church is a pure faith and a faultless practice; and this may be had only by faithful adherence to the truth as it is in Christ Jesus. We must ever be on our guard against any semblance of departure from that which is written, whether in teaching or prac-tice; and we should remember always that the teaching of Christ and his apostles constitute the only safe and all-sufficient rule of faith and practice for the saints of God.
He that abideth in the teaching, the same hath both the Father and the Son.–This is the same thought as that of the clause preceding, but stated positively, and with the addition of the phrase, “and the Son.” (Cf. 1Jn 2:23.) “He that abid-eth” (ho menon, keeps on abiding) in the teaching (of Christ), is the individual who recognizes the inviolate character of the teach-ing and veers neither to the right nor left of it. He regards the teaching of Christ (and that continued through his apostles) as the complete deposit of truth for this dispensation to which noth-ing more will be added, and from which nothing may be taken, and which is, therefore, the infallible standard of Christianity. He who recognizes this, and abides in it faithfully, has both the Father and the Son. There is such an intimate relationship sub-sisting between the Father and the Son that to have one is to have the other. Conversely, he who has not the one cannot have the other. And, one has neither when he fails to adhere steadfastly to the teaching of Christ.
Modernism, under the guise of progressiveness, is shrewd and adroit in its method of approach. It begins by reminding us that we live in the twentieth century, not the first; that conditions have changed and in our day necessitate a different and modernized approach; that the New Testament was never intended to be a stereotyped arrangement for all succeeding ages; and that “sanc-tified common sense” must be utilized in adapting its message to our time.
We should regard with grave suspicion anyone who would disparage the value of the New Testament or lessen its influence in any way for our time. All such should be solemnly reminded of Paul’s warning to the fickle Galatians: “I marvel that ye are so quickly removing from him that called you in the grace of Christ unto a different gospel: which is not another gospel only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema.” (Gal 1:6-8.)
10 If any one cometh unto you, and bringeth not this teaching, receive him not into your house, and give him no greeting:–The Greek construction here (indicative with ei), presents an actual case, and not a hypothetical one, as would have been indicated by can with the subjunctive. The meaning is, “When one comes to you bringing not this teaching, receive him not into your house, and give him no greeting. “This teaching” is the teaching of Christ, the teaching in which we must abide, and beyond which we must not progress, if we are to possess God. (Verse 9.)
In the first century, accommodations were few, and the. means to obtain them often non-existent on the part of the teachers and preachers of the word. Moreover, there was the obligation to extend Christian hospitality (Rom 12:13), as well as the natural desire to share their fellowship. The faithful sister to whom John wrote, of a benevolent disposition, possessed of a home, and evi-dently with sufficient means to entertain visitors, would occasion-ally be faced with the problem of deciding whether the teachers who came her way and who would claim her hospitality were worthy or not. The test which the apostle supplied her to use in such instances was this: Do they advocate the teaching of Christ? (verse 9), and particularly, Do they confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh? If not, she was not to receive them into her house; she was to show no hospitality to them; she was not so much as to give them greeting. The greeting was “Chairo!” lit-erally, goodspeed or Godspeed. This greeting was more than mere formality; it was an approval of the course being pursued by the one thus greeting, and included a desire for success in the effort attempted.
11 For he that giveth him greeting partaketh in his evil works.–And thus the reason why no such greeting should be extended to the advocates of false doctrine of whom John warned. To do so was to become a party to, and thus to be guilty of, the evil works characteristic of such. The severity of the injunction here given, and the apparent inhospitality which it contains, has led some to question the spirit which prompted it, and to attribute it to the fiery disposition of him who once sought to call down fire from heaven upon a village which treated the Lord with contempt. (Luk 9:51-55.) Such is, of course, to misunderstand what the apostle said, and to misapprehend the circumstances under which he said it.
(1) John does not here forbid hospitality to strangers, or, for that matter, to false teachers when, in so doing, false teaching is neither encouraged nor done. Were we to find a teacher known to be an advocate of false doctrine suffering, it would be our duty to minister to his need, provided that in so doing we did not abet or encourage him in the propagation of false doctrine. (2) What is forbidden is the reception of such teachers in such fashion as to supply them with an opportunity to teach their tenets, to maintain an association with them when such would involve us in the danger of accepting their doctrines. The passage teaches that we must do nothing that would in any way support or encourage the teach-ing of that which is not true. To do so is to share in the guilt of the teachers themselves. The principle here taught may not be legitimately extended to include association or hospitality extended to unbelieving relatives, strangers, or even false teachers when in so doing we do not (a) aid them in their work; (b) lend encour-agement to their efforts; (c) subject ourselves to the danger of corruption from them. The test is, Does one become a partaker by the action contemplated? If yes, our duty is clear we must neither receive them nor give them greeting; if No, the principle here taught is not applicable.
Commentary on 2Jn 1:7-11 by E.M. Zerr
2Jn 1:7. This verse corresponds with 1Jn 4:1.
2Jn 1:8. Look to yourselves means for them to watch and not let the deceivers get in their evil work of leading souls astray. John had converted them to the Gospel and he did not want to have the disappointment of seeing them perverted by false teachers. That is what he means by lose not those things which we have wrought. He did not wish to lose the work he had accomplished in leading them to Christ. Full reward. No worker for Christ is to be rewarded with eternal life on the basis of his success in converting people nor on the faithfulness of his converts. But the reward consists in the joy (at the present time) of seeing them faithful. This is virtually the meaning of his statement in 3Jn 1:4 regarding his “children.”
2Jn 1:9. This and the following verse is written in view of the warning expressed in verse 8. John is giving this group some instructions on how to detect false teachers. 01 course the principles laid down are general in their application and should be observed by churches today. To transgress means to go beyond something, or go farther than it indicates. The particular thing that John means is expressed by the words doctrine of Christ. The word “to go beyond” offered above as a definition of transgress is confirmed by the words in this verse, namely, abideth not in; the man who does this hath not God. This is logical and consistent with other passages in the New Testament. God is to be found in His word only as far as salvation is concerned, hence if a man leaves the word it necessarily follows that he leaves God. The doctrine of Christ cannot be restricted to the teaching that He gives in person, for he is not on the earth now and was not when John was writing. In Joh 13:20 Jesus says: “He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.” This shows that the doctrine of Christ includes the teaching of the apostles and all others who are inspired.
2Jn 1:10. This doctrine refers to the doctrine of Christ in the preceding verse where it is explained. A man coming unto the disciples who does not remain true to that doctrine is to be rejected. Not into your house. The question is often asked whether this means our personal home or the church building. It means either where the services are being conducted Of course in this particular instance it means the personal home because the church was contained in that place, but the same principle applies with reference to the regular church house. It should be understood this means not to receive him as a teacher. No man can be barred from coming into a church house as a spectator as long as he behaves himself, because it is a public place to which the laws of the land admit all people. And the same applies to the family home when it is used for church services. That is because all gatherings claiming to be by the church must be made public in order to be scriptural, regardless of where they are conducted. This verse requires the church to forbid all false teachers to speak to the assemblies, and if that instruction had always been observed the cause of Christ would have been preserved in many places.
2Jn 1:11. This verse extends the remarks at the close of the preceding one. It shows that we have no right to encourage false teachers even to the degree of expressing our good wishes. If we do we are partakers (having fellowship) of his evil deeds and thus become his partner in heresy.
Commentary on 2Jn 1:7-11 by N.T. Caton
2Jn 1:7-For many deceivers.
The reason for the earnestness of his exhortation to stability in the faith is here brought to the front. There are deceivers in the world-not one, but many. These must be guarded against, that no apostasy is caused, and the worthy lose their reward.
2Jn 1:7-Who confess not that Jesus Christ.
These deceivers refuse to confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh; that is to say, these persons whom I designate as deceivers. You may know them by their statements. They say that the Jesus foretold by the prophets, and who was born at Bethlehem, baptized of John; who taught in Palestine, healed the sick, cast out devils, gave sight to the blind, and speech to the dumb, and raised the dead; who was crucified, dead, and was buried in Joseph’s tomb; arose from the dead, ascended on high, sent down the Holy Spirit, commissioned his apostles, of whom I am one, to preach the gospel-that all these things did not occur; that there is no truth in all this; Jesus has not yet come, and we refuse to obey this Jesus that John his apostle preaches. Of these, and such as these, the writer affirms-deceiver, antichrist-opposer of Christ.
2Jn 1:8-Look to yourselves.
With relation to these deceivers, this antichrist, be careful; be on your guard as to their specious stories, their plausible speeches; be led not astray by them; cling to the faith of Christ. You have already begun your work for the reward of the righteous; this you do not want to lose; continue faithful and the full reward assured to all the finally faithful is yours.
2Jn 1:9-Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not.
Plain, it must be, that a life of transgression can not be pursued, and one so acting be in Christ; on the contrary, one so doing is not in Christ-that is, does not abide in Christ; and as all blessings are in him, the danger of loss or failure of reward is apparent. One not in Christ hath not God; that is, God’s favor and presence. One abiding in Christ, observing his doctrine, possesses both Christ and the Father, the favor and presence of both.
2Jn 1:10-If there come any unto you.
Such as described, who do not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, receive them not into your house. He may claim to be a brother; but no difference, give him no welcome as such, extend to him no such hospitality; and further, extend to him no wish for his success, and no encouragement in his work of deception. In short, such are not to be fellowshiped in any manner by the brethren.
2Jn 1:11-For he that biddeth him God speed.
In wishing a deceiver success, or offering to him encouragement and aid in his false and wicked course, you become a partaker of his evil deeds to the extent of the help given and aid afforded.
Commentary on 2Jn 1:7-11 by Burton Coffman
2Jn 1:7 –For many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even they that confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.
Antichrist … Of particular interest is this term, occurring here in the singular; however, it is quite clear that no single person is meant, from John’s identification of “antichrist” with “many deceivers.” In Campbell’s famous debate with Purcell, Campbell did not identify “the man of sin” with John’s “antichrist,” despite the fact of Purcell’s addressing his entire refutation against an affirmation which was not made by Campbell. Despite the general confusion to the effect that Paul’s man of sin (2 Thessalonians 2) should be identified with John’s “antichrist,” there is no solid ground for this. It could be, however, that “antichrist,” a spirit already working in John’s time, should be identified with the “lawless one” to be revealed shortly before the Second Advent; for, as Paul said, “the spirit of lawlessness” was already working in his time also (2Th 2:7); but neither “antichrist” nor the “lawless one” may be absolutely identified with “the man of sin,” except in the sense of being an ultimate development of the apostasy evident in “the man of sin.”
Many deceivers … “These were formerly members of the Church who had apostatized (1Jn 2:19).”[13]
They confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh … The heresy of the false deceivers was that of denying the Incarnation. Various scholars have identified such teachers as Docetists, Cerinthians, and Gnostics. Of significance is the fact that the apostle did not yield in the slightest to any of their speculations. The apostolic doctrine is that Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of God who was Christ, not only after his baptism, but in his death, burial and resurrection as well. With the apostle John, and all the New Testament teachers, the confession of full faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God was central, imperative and absolutely essential to the Christian faith.
The “many deceivers” mentioned in 2Jn 1:7 stand in this letter opposed to the “certain of thy children walking in the truth,” as mentioned in 2Jn 1:4, with the possible interpretation that both those walking faithfully and the deceivers were children of a single congregation. Concerning the deceivers, John here presented “a double warning: (1) for the Christians not to be deceived themselves (2Jn 1:8-9), and (2) not to give any encouragement to the false teachers (2Jn 1:10-11).”[14]
[13] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 1061.
[14] John R. W. Stott, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 19 (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1964), p. 208.
2Jn 1:8 –Look to yourselves, that ye lose not the things which we have wrought, but that ye receive a full reward.
Look to yourselves … The plural here denies this as a letter to a single individual; it is clearly a congregation of people that John had in view, some of Whom were “walking in truth,” others of whom were deceivers.
That ye lose not the things which we wrought … Smith paraphrased the meaning thus: “See that you do not forfeit the reward of your labor; get a full wage. Be not like the workmen who toward the close of the day, do their work badly and get less than a full day’s pay.”[15] It should be remembered by all Christians that in the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, the payment of the workers came at the close of the day, “when the evening was come.” All should remember that fidelity to the end of life is enjoined.
ENDNOTE:
[15] David Smith, The Expositor’s Greek New Testament, Vol. V (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1967), p. 202.
2Jn 1:9 –Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ, hath not God: he that abideth in the teaching, the same hath both the Father and the Son.
Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ … The false teachers evidently considered themselves “advanced thinkers,” progressing beyond the teaching of Christ; but the apostle here denied the pretensions of such men. Whoever advances beyond the New Testament, has advanced right out of Christianity. “Our aim should be not to be advanced, but to abide in the doctrine of Christ.”[16]
Many have rationalized their departure from the teachings of Jesus Christ through the vain belief that, “Theology is to God’s revelation in Grace as science is to his revelation in Nature”;[17] but it is not true that the apostles were limited in what they revealed to mankind in the New Testament. The Holy Spirit guided them into “all truth,” a fact that was much in John’s mind as he wrote these letters; and those theologians who fancy that they are able to discover more and more glorious things concerning God and the redemption of human souls, than those eternal truths revealed in the New Testament, are totally and radically wrong, that being the categorical affirmation of this 2Jn 1:9.
As MacKnight expressed it:
The person who either neglects to teach any part of the doctrine of Christ, or who teaches what is not the doctrine of Christ, is culpable, and does not acknowledge God.[18]
The heresy of this age is that religious teachers may “go beyond” Christ’s teachings in any direction they please, or that they may eliminate from their doctrine any of the Lord’s teachings that they hold to be unnecessary or distasteful to themselves. The apostle John, in this verse, sufficiently warned all people that such departures or omissions remove people from any claim of having God.
In a practical sense, of course, this limits authority in the Christian religion to the teachings of the New Testament, because there and there alone may be found the authentic truth “first spoken by the Lord,” and delivered unto us “by them that heard him.” A proper appreciation of this truth would relegate a great deal of present day religiosity to the ash heap.
[16] Leon Morris, The New Bible Commentary, Revised (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 1272.
[17] David Smith, op. cit., p. 202.
[18] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 144.
2Jn 1:10 –If any one cometh unto you, and bringeth not this teaching, receive him not into your house, and give him no greeting:
It is sometimes alleged from this verse that “your house” here seems to suggest an individual’s home; but your is not in the Greek, and the passage would be better rendered as “receive him not into house.”
Is such an admonition as this verse contains uncharitable? Some have so alleged. Plummer thought that Christians should take a great deal of care before “venturing to act upon the injunction given here.” Also, C. H. Dodd, “declined to heed it.”[19] Such reluctance, however, is due to a gross failure to understand, either the destructive and murderous result of false teaching, or the evil nature of false teachers. The people in view by the apostle here were immoral, self-seeking hypocrites, true children of the devil, deserving fully the treatment prescribed for them by the apostle John. Today, no less than when John wrote, there are false religious teachers who should be treated exactly as John recommended. The apostle’s injunction here may not be written off as merely some kind of an emergency requirement, after the manner of Dodd, who commented that “emergency regulations make bad law.”[20] It seems very sad that a Christian should take such an attitude toward a fellow human being; but it should be remembered that these people were denying the Lord Jesus Christ. There are false teachers now whose denials are just as destructive of faith and virtue.
Give him no greeting … “This signifies church approval, or commendation.”[21] For a congregation of the Lord’s people to extend to false teachers housing, approval and recommendation would be for the church to preside at its own execution.
[19] R. W. Orr, A New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1969), p. 624.
[20] C. H. Dodd, as quoted by William Barclay, The Letters of John and Jude (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1976), p. 145.
[21] R. W. Orr, op. cit., p. 624.
2Jn 1:11 –for he that giveth him greeting partaketh in his evil works.
Present-day Christians are very reluctant to receive this teaching, Smith stating that:
Heretics are our fellow-creatures, and our office is to win them. If we close our doors and our hearts against them, we lose our opportunity of winning them and harden them in their opposition.[22]
All such comments fail to take into consideration the identity of the people John was speaking about. They were false teachers of anti-Christian doctrine, having already acquired the status of open enemies of the Lord and of his Church. What John said of them was absolutely in line with the admonition of Jesus Christ himself who taught, concerning false teachers, that his followers were to “let them alone!” (Mat 15:14). Hospitality and friendship extended to known enemies of the truth is a violation of our Lord’s word, as well as that of the apostle John. Many a young Christian, unaware of the true nature of the enemy, as well as of the cunning seductiveness of error, has violated the prohibition here with a result of their own everlasting ruin.
ENDNOTE:
[22] David Smith, op. cit., p. 203.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
world
kosmos = mankind. (See Scofield “Mat 4:8”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
many: 2Pe 2:1-3, 1Jo 2:18-22, 1Jo 4:1
who: Joh 1:14, 1Ti 3:16, 1Jo 4:2, Rev 12:9, Rev 13:14
This is: 1Jo 2:22, 1Jo 4:3
Reciprocal: Jer 29:8 – Let Dan 11:34 – cleave Luk 21:8 – Take Act 20:30 – of your Rom 1:3 – according Rom 10:9 – That if Rom 14:11 – confess Rom 16:17 – cause 2Co 2:17 – which 2Co 11:13 – false Gal 1:7 – pervert Phi 2:11 – every Col 2:4 – lest Col 2:18 – no 1Ti 1:3 – charge Heb 5:7 – the Heb 9:11 – Christ Heb 10:5 – but Heb 10:20 – his 1Jo 2:26 – concerning 1Jo 4:15 – confess
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2Jn 1:7. This verse corresponds with 1Jn 4:1.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
2Jn 1:7. There is no love which is not based on truth: the love which keeps the commandments keeps the doctrinal as well as the ethical commandments. And, as love is the strength of obedience, so it is the guardian of the truth. Hence the for that follows: for many deceivers are gone forth into the worldfrom the spiritual world, the sphere of the liethey that confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh. The supreme truthas truth is in Jesusis the incarnation. This is the deceiver and the antichrist, of whom the former Epistle spoke: the deceiver as it regards you, the antichrist as it respects Jesus. Cometh in the flesh refers in the most general way to the incarnation itself: not as a past fact, came in the flesh (1Jn 5:6); nor as the fact with its results, hath come (1Jn 4:2); but in its widest universality, though without reference to the second coming.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Having exhorted them to perseverence in the faith before, he subjoins a reason for that exhortation now, because many deceivers are entered into the world, & c. Many imposters were gone forth abroad, who denied, some of the divinity, others the humanity of Christ, and so razed the very foundations of Christianity, and thus discovered themselves to oppose Jesus Christ.
Learn hence, That even from the beginning our Lord Jesus has had those who have disowned his natures, and denied his offices, the divinity of his person, the meritoriousness of his satisfaction; these are antichrists, persons maliciously set against Christ, and they shall find him righteously set against them in the day when they shall be summoned by him solemnly to appear before him.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Beware of Deceivers
The only way for a Christian to be sure he receives a full reward for his works in the gospel cause is through strictly adhering to the teachings of Jesus ( Mat 7:21-23 ). When one does not remain in that doctrine, he loses fellowship with God. The word translated “transgresses” literally means goes onward. Evidently, these false teachers said they were progressive and ahead in their thinking, but they had gone too far since they went beyond God ( 2Jn 1:9 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
ARGUMENT 15
THE CHRISTHOOD
7. Because many deceivers have come into the world, who do not confess that Jesus Christ is coming in the flesh, the same is the deceiver and Antichrist.
8. Beware of them in order that you may not destroy the things you may have done but may receive a full reward.
9. Every one going forth and not abiding in the doctrine of Christ hath not
God. He that abideth in the doctrine hath both the Father and Son.
10. If any one cometh unto you and bringeth not this doctrine do not receive him into your house, and do not say unto him God speed.
11. He that saith to him God speed partaketh of his evil deeds. These five verses set forth a summary of Johns climacteric of the Christhood which he constantly emphasizes, as the citadel of revealed truth, and the palladium of the Christians hope. Unfortunately the seventh verse in English, is come in the flesh, is wrong, the true Greek, erchomenon, is coming in the flesh, being in the present tense. So important is this great doctrine of the Christhood, i.e., that the God-man Christ has come on the earth, perfected the plan of salvation, ascended up to heaven, and is coming again in the flesh, i.e., His glorified body, when the Father has made His enemies His footstool, to sit upon the throne of His glory and reign forever. Meanwhile the literal Christ encumbers the mediatorial throne in heaven, the spiritual Christ, in the person of the Holy Ghost (Joh 16:7), succeeds Him on the earth, calling out, inspiring and adorning His Bride to meet Him in holy wedlock, when He rides down on a cloud, and reign with Him forever. Since this glorious doctrine of the Christhood constitutes the essence of the redemptive scheme, we are to guard it as the apple of the eye, filled with spiritual discernment, ever ready to detect the cloven foot of Antichrist and the soft palaver of the false prophets, who in Johns day were making sad havoc with the Church. In our day they are innumerable as the locusts of Egypt, bidding defiance to every approach of simple, solid, Gospel truth. It is not only indispensable that we be born of God and sanctified wholly, but that we be fortified by all the gifts and graces of the Spirit, so beautifully described by Paul (1 Corinthians 12 and 1 Peter 1). If the Church had been true to the warning of John, pertinaciously standing aloof from and rejecting the Antichrists and false prophets of all ages, the millennium would have been here in all its glory before you and I were born.
12. John in this verse expresses an ardent hope to preach to the dear saints, though already about one hundred years old, flooded with the Holy Ghost, looking up to heaven, whither in his transfigured glory he soon ascended, as attested by the Apostolic fathers. As he was the last writer, of course we have no inspired record of his translation.
13. This verse contains the Christian greeting of the saintly household, doubtless extending their hospitality to the patriarch.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
1:7 {3} 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.
(3) Antichrists fighting against the person and office of Christ had already crept into the Church, in the time of the apostles.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
B. Protecting the Truth vv. 7-11
Next John moved on to his second purpose. He wrote to encourage his readers to resist the false teachers who were distorting the truth and deceiving some of the believers.
"The presbyter’s attention now moves from the existence of true belief inside the Johannine community, which gives him great joy (2Jn 1:4), to the dangers presented to it through the espousal of false belief by deceivers who have ’defected into the world.’ Earlier, the writer has spoken of Christian truth and love; in the remainder of 2 John the emphasis inevitably falls on the need for truth in contrast to error. But the two sections interlock. Departure from the truth results in a failure of love. Thus the dark description of heretical secession and its consequences (2Jn 1:7-11) forms the basis of John’s warm appeal for love and unity (2Jn 1:4-6)." [Note: Smalley, p. 327.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
This verse gives the reason for the exhortation in 2Jn 1:6 and links what follows with 2Jn 1:4-6.
". . . the wandering prophets and preachers did present a problem. Their position was one which was singularly liable to abuse. They had an enormous prestige; and it was possible for the most undesirable characters to enter into a way of life in which they moved from place to place, living in very considerable comfort at the expense of the local congregations. A clever rogue could make a very comfortable living as an itinerant prophet. Even the pagan satirists saw this. Lucian, the Greek writer, in his work called the Peregrinus, draws the picture of a man who had found the easiest possible way of making a living without working. He was an itinerant charlatan who lived on the fat of the land by travelling [sic] round the various communities of the Christians, and settling down wherever he liked, and living luxuriously at their expense." [Note: Barclay, p. 156.]
Erroneous teaching had already begun to proliferate in the early church (e.g., Gnosticism, Docetism, Cerinthianism, etc.; cf. 1Jn 2:18; 1Jn 2:22-23; 1Jn 2:27; 1Jn 4:1-3). The common error was Christological. The false teachers regarded Jesus as something other than God’s Anointed One who had come in the flesh (cf. 1Jn 5:1). "Coming" in the flesh means having come and continuing in flesh. This is the true view of the Incarnation. Jesus was and continues to be fully God and fully man.
"Christ is never said to come into flesh, but in flesh; the former would leave room for saying that deity was united with Jesus sometime after his birth." [Note: Charles C. Ryrie, "The Second Epistle of John," in The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1480.]
"The incarnation was more than a mere incident, and more than a temporary and partial connection between the Logos and human nature. It was the permanent guarantee of the possibility of fellowship, and the chief means by which it is brought about." [Note: A. E. Brooke, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Johannine Epistles, p. 175.]
This type of false teacher is a deceiver as well as opposed to Christ. John did not mean that such a person was the end-time Antichrist. The use of the definite article in Greek, translated "the," used with an unnamed individual as here, sometimes translates better with the English indefinite article "a" or "an." That understanding of this statement is preferable here in view of other Scriptures that indicate the end-time Antichrist has yet to appear (e.g., Daniel 11; 2 Thessalonians 2).
"The elder says that anybody who denies the truth is a very antichrist, just as we might speak of a supremely evil person as ’the very devil.’" [Note: Marshall, p. 71.]