22 - 1Jn 2:16
Ὅτι πᾶν τὸ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ, ἡ ἐπιθυμία τῆς σαρκὸς, καὶ ἡ ἐπιθυμία τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν, καὶ ἡ ἀλαζονεία τοῦ βίου οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου ἐστί.
Very noteworthy and strictlyJohannaeanis the method of establishing the thought thus uttered, with which is at the same time connected a further explanation of the idea τὰ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ [“the things in the world”].The former takes the form of an emphatic repetition of what had been said, while the consequences involved in the matter itself are now brought out more tersely. This is the apostle’s genuine method of demonstration. When we closely examine the thoughts themselves, we find that, first of all, he specifies the con tents ofπᾶν τὸ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ [“all that is in the world”]by the three definitions already mentioned,ἐπιθυμίατῆς σαρκὸς [“desire of the flesh”], ἐπιθυμία τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν [“desire of the eyes”], ἀλαζονείατοῦ βίου [“boastful pride of life”].In the form we have a trichotomy, which, however, resolves itself into two parts, as theἐπιθυμία[“desire”] is developed in two directions. relation of the ἀλαζονεία[“boastful pride”] to theἐπιθυμία[“desire”]is easily perceptible: the latter presupposes a want, the former a possession; they are related as the desire for enjoyment, and the enjoyment of what is desired, but in such a way that the egoistic element is prominent. The ἀλαζονεία [“boastful pride”]is not enjoyment in itself, but as connected with proud contempt for others; and, in harmony with this, theἐπιθυμία[“desire”] is not desiring in itself, but the desiring of what does not belong to me, the envying of others for the sake of self, though this may be an unconscious sentiment. I will have, and I as in contrast with others(ἀλαζονεία [“boastful pride”]).But notἐπιθυμία[“desire”]andἀλαζονεία [“boastful pride”] are spoken of: they take a definite form. The desire is partly that of the flesh, partly that of the eyes. It is obvious that the eyes refer rather to an intellectual, psychical element of enjoyment; the flesh rather to enjoyment in the physical domain. With this it is connected that the flesh seeks rather active enjoyments, in which it is itself not merely the means of that enjoyment, but also the subject that enjoys; while the eye can only take up objects external and alien, and is viewed only as the medium of enjoyment. Active and therefore more sensual, passive and therefore more psychical, enjoyments are thus distinguished by the apostle. A similar isolating specification of the eye, which, however, one might say is already subjoined under the notion ofσάρξ [“flesh”],but by which it gains a more independent position, we find in Mat 6:22. There the eye is set over against the whole body; and in such a way that its characteristic quality conditions that of the whole body. But this view of the matter is here, in conformity with the connection, left altogether out of view.
Similarly, the termἀλαζονεία [“boastful pride”]is more closely defined by the genitiveτοῦβίου [“of life”].St. John uses this word only once more,1Jn 3:17 but in both passages, as throughout theNew Testament, with definite distinction fromζωή [“life”].That is to say, like the verb βιόω[“life”] of 1Pe 1:1,—aἅπαξ λεγόμενον[hápax legómenon, “said only once”] in the New Testament,—the noun signifies only the external life of man as belonging to the material world, which is sustained by eating and drinking; on the other hand, the ζωή [zōē, “life”]refers ever to the personality of life, the spiritual being of the man, thus forming a contrast to βίος[bios, “life”]: passages such as Luk 12:15, Luk 16:25; 1Co 1:1,[N] andJas 4:14, are no exceptions to this rule. But bothβίος[“life”]and ζωή [“life”] occur, each in its several sphere as just indicated, with a twofold reference. As ζωή [“life”] now describes natural personal life, and now that life as filled with the divine eternal life; so βίος[“life”] is sometimes used generally of the natural life in itself, and sometimes of the powers which fill and sustain it,—that is, of thesustentationof life. In1Jn 3:17 it is to be understood without doubt in the latter sense: how here, is a question. The passage of this same Epistle just mentioned would recommend us to attach to it here the same narrower meaning; but, on the other hand, there is nothing in this passage to indicate such a restriction, while such a restriction of the idea is not in harmony with the context, which points to the widest possible interpretation. Not only rich nourishment, but all the good of the present external life, high position, money, honour, and the like, givesustentationto theἀλαζονεία [“boastful pride”].But the word βίος[“life”]is chosen, because the life of the natural man is after all only a purely external life. As the natural man is calledσάρξ [“flesh”], although he has also the natural human spirit, because the flesh has the dominion, and even the most seemingly spiritual interests stand in the long run under the empire of corporeity impregnated with sin; so the whole life is here calledβίος[“life”], because the pride and exultation in honour, personal consideration, and other apparently spiritual things, are in reality nothing but the same hanging on and cleaving to the things of the created, material world, although in another form. As selfishness may sometimes deny itself, and postpone its pleasure, and appear as self-renunciation; so theἀλαζονεία [“boastful pride”]may sometimes assume the forms of a higher life, although it fundamentally springs from theσάρξ [“flesh”]and its life, the βίος[“life”]. Now this double desire and this pride are said to beπᾶν τὸ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ [“all that is in the world”].Or may they be only examples of what is in the world, individual examples of theπᾶν[“all”] in the beginning of the verse? In favour of this it may be said that the dependence on false teachers, presently spoken of, certainly belongs to the κόσμος [“world”];while yet it cannot be dovetailed into the specimens here adduced. But that would be unsound argument. For the anti-Christian nature is not independent of theἀλαζονεία [“boastful pride”]and theἐπιθυμία [“desire”];it is only the concrete form into which these run, and it grows out of them directly. All else that may be mentioned is only the development of these germs. But that we may exhibit in all their clearness the thoughts of the apostle, we must once more return and fasten our thought upon the idea of theκόσμος [“world”].We have seen that the creation and all it contains is not of itself called κόσμος [“world”], but only as it is determined by sin and impregnated by sinful forces. This sinful characteristic does not inhere in itself, but it becomes partaker of it through the fact that man makes it the instrument of his sin. Hence also its nature and essence is presented as a subjective one; theὀφθαλμοί [“eyes”] andσάρξ [“flesh”]; which desire belong to man, and the βίος[“life”]is the sphere in which the man absorbs that from the earthly creation which he had taken into his service, and has consequently also a subjective side. But in any case, the desire and the pride itself which proceeds from the eyes, the flesh, the life, is absolutely and altogether something subjective. Accordingly, the proper ground and substance of the idea κόσμος [“world”] lie not in the things of the world, but in man, who uses them. But when, on the other hand, it is said that this desire and this pride areἐκ τοῦ κόσμου [“from the world”],the opposite seems to hold good; sin seems to be transferred to created things, and from them sinful desires and sinful pride seem to take their rise, and come into men. And this view we find elsewhere in Scripture. InRom 8:19-20, ματαιότης[“depravity”] is ascribed to the irrational creature, which longs to be freed from it, and aδουλεία τῆς φθορᾶς[“bondage of decay”] under which it groans. And this, like much else in the Scriptures of the Old and the New Testaments, leads us to the thought of a change or depravation of the creature through sin. The world, which stood in no original contact with evil, is not only depraved by man in individual cases, or in virtue of specific sinful acts, but, as the originally sinless body of man was not only made into the organ of sin, but in consequence of sin evil so penetrated and pervaded it that it on its side also influences and makes sinful the spiritual life of man; so also the whole earthly creation has been drawn into the kingdom of darkness, and exercises now a depraving influence on man, who had previously corrupted it. Man originally, or, more specifically, the flesh and the eye, lusted, and he perverted the creature to the service of pride; as the result of this, the world is so pervaded with sin, that out of itself now the lust that covets it and the provocation to pride proceed. The ἐπιθυμία [“desire”]andἀλαζονεία [“boastful pride”], which originally sprang from man, now proceed from the world, and thereby it becomes in the scriptural sense theκόσμος [“world”];thereby all that is the τὸ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ [“that in the world”],the evil principle filling the creature, may be said to come ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου [“from the world”].And it is this very thing that it is the apostle’s purpose to emphasize in one verse: he has said in the verse preceding that love to the world and to that which is in it, as its moving principle, cannot consist with the love of God. The evidence thus lies in the progression from that which isἐν τῷ κόσμῳ [“in the world”] to the ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου [“from the world”]. The difference of origin between love of God and love of the world affirms and establishes the all-pervading and ineffaceable opposition between the two for all time and for all stages of development.