25 - 1Jn 2:19
Ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐξῆλθον, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἦσαν ἐξ ἡμῶν· εἰ γὰρ ἦσαν ἐξ ἡμῶν, μεμενήκεισαν ἂν μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν· ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα φανερωθῶσιν ὅτι οὐκ εἰσὶ πάντες ἐξ ἡμῶν. The warning to Christians to be on their guard against this enemy was all the more needful, because the antichrists came forth from the bosom of the church itself: on the one hand, it is evident how these Christians might themselves be entangled in their corruption; and on the other hand, their earlier connection with these men suggested the danger of their being willing to remain in fellowship with them notwithstanding their anti-Christian spirit. There is a peculiarly painful feeling breathed in the words of this nineteenth verse. If to any men the apostle’s appeal in1Jn 1:1applied, that they were not to be prayed for, it might appear that these antichrists were the people. Nevertheless, he manifestly looks upon them with sorrowful sympathy, with the same sympathy which we observe in our Lord when He remembers in His high-priestly prayer theυἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας[“son of perdition”cf.John 17:12]. The antichrists, like Judas their type, had once been in another relation to the church of Christ:ἐξ ἡμῶνἐξῆλθαν[“went out from us”]. This may be understood in the sense ofexierunt;but also in the sense ofprodierunt;either that they left us, or that they sprang up in our midst. The former view is distinctly opposed by the followingἀλλά[“but”]. It would be an illogical thought that they have separated from us, hut they were not of us: we should have expected in that case aγάρ[“for”]. This conjunctive requires us to takeἐξῆλθαν[“went out”], as inActs 15:24, in the sense of origination:prodicrunt a nobis. They have indeed gone out from among us, they stand in historical connection with us, butοὐκἦσανἐξἡμῶν[“they were not of us”]; inwardly they have always been estranged from us; for if they ever had belonged to us, they would not have been able to leave us. He who goes back into the world has never perfectly broken with the world. It follows from what is said here, that not the denial, but the renunciation of Christianity is the essential nature of Antichrist: the light has come upon him, has touched him, butἡ σκοτία οὐ κατέλαβεν αὐτό[“the darkness did not comprehend it”]. With a brachylogical turn the apostle goes on:ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα φανερωθῶσιν ὅτι οὐκ εἰσὶ πάντες ἐξ ἡμῶν[“so that it would be shown that they all are not of us”]. Theἀλλά[“but”] is most easily supplemented byταῦταγέγονεν[“these became”]; and thisἀλλ᾽ἵνα[“but so that”] is not unusual with St. John: compareJohn 8:18;John 15:25; but notJohn 14:31, where the close of the verseἐγείρεσθεκ.τ.λ.[“at raise up, etc.”] is not to be separated from the preceding, as in theTextus Receptus,by a point, but forms the main sentence belonging toἀλλά[“but”]. The apostle says that it was the divine purpose that the anti-Christian spirit which clung to the church should in the course of time be revealed, should be made known as such, and thus the congregation be cleansed from it. The divine purpose is represented as seen only in theφανερωθῆναι[“to make known”], and not in the existence of the anti-Christian element itself. Predestinarian theories can be no more extracted from the sentence than they can be refuted by it; for, in fact, such questions are altogether out of the scope of the passage. The presentation of the design is here entirely the same as in the words of the psalmist (Psa 51:4[N]):עָ֫שִׂ֥יתִי|בְּעֵינֶ֗יךָ|הָרַ֥ע|בְשָׁפְטֶֽךָ|תִּזְכֶּ֥ה|בְּדָבְרֶ֗ךָ|תִּצְדַּ֥ק|לְ֭מַעַן [“So that you are justified when you speak and blameless when you judge”]. David there does not by any means attribute his being evil to any determination of God, but the doing of sin, the expression of his interior evil. The meaning is, that if I had not fallen into any of these courses of wickedness, and Thou hadst nevertheless punished me, that would have been perfectly righteous; for only the expressions of my evil nature would have been wanting, because the opportunity was wanting; myself would then have been as evil as I am now. But my punishment would then have had the semblance of injustice, because my sin would have been perfectly known only to myself, and not to another. But now hast Thou let me fall into dreadful guilt. Thou hast let my heart’s evil be brought to light, that Thy judgment might be seen to be righteous. Thus, in the psalmist’s words, not the being evil, but the manifestation of the evil was brought into act by God. So it is also here. It is not regarded as God’s work that the antichrists were such as they were, but they unfolded their character as such; that the mask was withdrawn, and thus they were proved never to have belonged to the church. Thus the divine purpose in this clause refers not to theοὐκ ἐξ ἡμῶν ἦσαν[“they were not of us”], but to their manifest appearance and exhibition as antichrists,1Jn 2:18. Formally, indeed, thetelicclause is not constructed with exactness: theπάντες[“all”] is embarrassing. The author does not mean to say that not all anti-Christians areἐξἡμῶν[“of us”]: that would have been awkward, as they certainly are all of them notἐξἡμῶν[“of us”]; but that these anti-Christian elements demonstrate that not all Christians areἐξἡμῶν[“of us”]. The two ideas that all the antichrists are not, and that Christians are not all, belonging to the Christian church, are packed together into one, as often happens in ordinary phrase. Here it is with ease explained if we assume that St. John, like St. Paul, was in the habit of dictating his Epistles.