1 John 5

1 John 5:1

II. THE POWER OF THE CHRISTIAN LIFE: THE VICTORY AND WITNESS OF FAITH (v. 1—12).

The whole of this section is closely connected, but two main thoughts, ‘Faith’ and ‘Witness,’ respectively prevail in the opening and closing verses. Thus it may be divided into two parts,

1. The victory of Faith (1-5). 2. The Divine Witness (6-12). 1. The victory of Faith (v. 1-5).

In the last section it has been seen that the love of ’the brethren’ is enjoined as an essential accompaniment of the love of God. St John now traces the foundations of spiritual kinsmanship. ‘Brethren’ are united by a common Divine Father. The human condition of this union is faith in Jesus as the Christ. This faith is able to overcome and has potentially overcome every force of the world. The succession of thought is clearly marked. Faith is the sign of a new life, and the presence of this life involves love for all who share it (1). The reality of this love is shewn by active obedience (2, 3). Such obedience is made possible by the gift of a Divine life, a truth which is affirmed in the abstract, and also in regard to the Life of Christ (4), and in regard to the experience of the believer (5).

¹ Every one that believes that Jesus is the Christ is begotten of God, and every one that loveth him that begot loveth him that is begotten of him. ² In this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and do his commandments; ³ for this is the love of God, that we observe his commandments, and his commandments are not grievous; ⁴ because everything that is begotten of God overcometh the world; and this is the victory that overcame the world, even our faith. ⁵ [Yea,] who is he that overcometh the world but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

1. The transition from the former section lies in the thought of brotherhood. Brotherhood is founded on the vital apprehension of the revelation of Christ given by God. It is not then an arbitrary command that he who loves God love his brother also. He must do so. For he consciously shares with every brother the principle of his new being.

Ἦᾶς ὁ πιστεύων] Comp. c. iii. 3.

The verb πιστεύειν is here used for the first time in the epistle in its full and definite sense. In iv. 16 it describes a general position with regard to the Divine purpose. In iii. 23 it expresses a belief in the truth of the revelation as to Christ. Here it presents that belief in a direct and personal form. ‘He that believeth that Jesus is the Christ’ not only admits an intellectual truth but enters into a direct relation with the powers of a spiritual order. ‘The command’ of God (iii. 23) finds so far an individual accomplishment.

In the former chapter (iv. 2, 15; comp. ii. 23), St John has spoken of the ‘confession’ of Christ in relation to society: here he speaks of faith in relation to the single believer. The main thought there was of the recognition, here of the essence of the children of God. The forms of confession are given in the most explicit form. The article of faith is given more simply. A living faith carries with it more than the exact terms of specific belief convey (John xi. 27).

Compare re. 5, 10, 13.

Such faith involves the present action of a new and Divine life, which must have a Divine origin. Comp. 1 Cor. xii. 3. Faith here is regarded simply as the sign of the life which has been given. Nothing is said of the relation between the human and

1 ἀγ. τὸν γεγ. B vg the: ἀγ.+καὶ τὸν γεγ. (ℵ) A syrr. τὸν γεγ.: τὸ γεγ. ℵ.

the Divine—the faith of man, and ’the seed of God’ (iii. 9)—in the first quickening of life. Comp. John i. 12 note.

ὅτι ‘I. ἐστὶν ὁ χριστός] Comp. v. 5 ὅτι ‘I. ἐστὶν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ. John xx. 31 ὅτι ‘I. ἐστὶν ὁ χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ. For the choice of the exact terms of belief here, see ii. 22.

ἐκ τοῦ θ. γεγ.] See c. iii. 9 note.

καὶ πᾶς ὁ ἀγ. τ. γενν.] et omnis qui diligit eum qui genuit V., and every one that loveth Him that begat… It is assumed that the child will have love for the Author of his being. Love follows directly from life. And in this spiritual connexion love must be directed to the character, and not to the Person apart from the character. It follows therefore that it will be extended to all those to whom the character has been communicated.

ὁ ἀγαπῶν] Augustine brings out the necessary connexion between faith and love (faith in action): cum dilectione, fides Christiani: sine dilectione, fides daemonis.

τὸν γενν.] The word is used also of the human agent, Philem. 10.

τὸν γεγενν. ἐξ αὐτοῦ] eum qui natus est ex eo V., him that hath been begotten of Him, the child who draws from Him the abiding principle of his life. The singular (contrast ’the children’ v. 2) emphasises the direct relation of Father and child, and also of brother and brother. This relation, as here regarded, is personal and not social.

Throughout the Epistle St John individualises: ii. 4 ff., 9 ff., 15, 17, 22 f., 29; iii. 3 ff., 9 f., 15, 17.

The idea of Augustine that the reference is to Christ is foreign to the context.

Additional Note on v. 1. The use of the term ’the Christ.’

The use of the term ’the Christ’ in the Apostolic age not from the Old Testament.

The use of the term in (i) the Law, (ii) the Historical Books,

The history of the title ‘Messiah,’ ‘Christ’ (הַמָּשִׁיחַ, ὁ χριστός, ’the Anointed One’) is very remarkable. It is not a characteristic title of the promised Saviour in the O. T. It is not even specifically applied to Him, unless perhaps in Dan. ix. 25 f., a passage of which the interpretation is very doubtful. And still in the apostolic age it was generally current among the Jews in Judaea, Galilee, Samaria, and in the Dispersion; and it was applied by them to the object of their religious and national hope (Matt. ii. 4, xvi. 16, xxii. 42; John i. 20, 41, iv. 25, xii. 34; Acts ix. 22, xvii. 3, xviii. 28, xxvi. 23). The Hebrew word had been clothed in a Greek dress, and was current side by side with the Greek equivalent (Μεσσίας John i. 42, iv. 25).

The word מָשִׁיחַ, ‘anointed,’ occurs several times in the Book of Leviticus in the phrase הַכֹּהֵן הַמָּשִׁיחַ: Lev. iv. 3 (ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς ὁ κεχρισμένος), v. 16; vi. 15 (ὁ ἀρχ. ὁ χριστός). Comp. 2 Macc. i. 10 (ἀπὸ τοῦ τῶν χριστῶν ἱερέων γένοιας).

In the Historical Books the word is used of the representative kings of the theocratic nation: Of Saul:

1 Sam. xii. 3, 5 מָשִׁיחוֹ, ὁ χριστὸς αὐτοῦ.

1 Sam. xxiv. 6, 11; xxvi. 16; 2 Sam. i. 14, 16 מָשִׁיחַ יְהוָה, LXX. ὁ χριστὸς κυρίου.

1 Sam. xxvi. 9, 11, 23 מָשִׁיחַ יְהוָה, LXX. χριστὸς κυρίου.

Comp. 2 Sam. i. 21 בְּלִי מָשִׁיחַ בַּשָּׁמֶן, LXX. οὐκ ἐχρισθῆ ἐν ἐλαίῳ.

Of David:

1 Sam. xvi. 6 מָשִׁיחוֹ, LXX. ὁ χριστὸς αὐτοῦ.

2 Sam. xix. 21 מָשִׁיחַ יְהוָה, LXX. ὁ χριστὸς κυρίου.

2 Sam. xxiii. 1 מָשִׁיחַ אֱלֹהֵי יַעֲקֹב, LXX. χριστὸς θεοῦ Ἰακώβ.

2 Sam. xxii. 51.

Ps. xviii. 50.

Of Solomon:

2 Chron. vi. 42 מָשִׁיחֶךָ, LXX. ὁ χριστὸς σου.

Of Jehu:

2 Chron. xxii. 7 LXX. πρὸς Ἰηοῦ…χριστὸν κυρίου, אֲשֶׁר מָשְׁחוֹ יְהוָה.

Compare the wider use in:

1 Sam. ii. 10 וְיָרֵם קֶרֶן מָשִׁיחוֹ… יְהוָה, LXX. ὑψώσει κέρας χριστοῦ αὐτοῦ ii. 35 לִפְנֵי מָשִׁיחִי, LXX. ἐνώπιον χριστῶν (χριστοῦ) μου.

1 Chron. xvi. 22.

Ps. cv. 15.

(iii) the Prophets,

In the Prophets the word is used of Cyrus:

In the second passage where it occurs it is doubtful whether it is used in a personal or national sense:

Hab. iii. 13 לִשְׁעַ אֶת־מִשְׁחָךְ, LXX. τοῦ σῶσαι τοὺς χριστούς σου.

It occurs twice in a difficult passage of the Book of Daniel:

Dan. ix. 25 מָשִׁיחַ נָגִיד, Theod. χριστὸς ἡγούμενος. „ 26 יִכָּרֵת מָשִׁיחַ, Theod. ἐξολεθρεύσεται χρίσμα.

Compare also:

Amos iv. 13 LXX. ἀπαγγέλλων τὸν χριστὸν αὐτοῦ.

Hebr. מַגִּיד… מַה־שֶּׂחוֹ.

In the Psalms the Divine King who is the type of ’the Christ’ is spoken (iv) the of as ’the anointed of the Lord’; and there can be no doubt that it was Hagiofrom the Psalms, and especially from Ps. ii., that the word passed into grapha. common use in the special technical sense.

Ps. xviii. 50 לְמִשְׁחוֹ לְדָוִד, LXX. τῷ χριστῷ αὐτοῦ τῷ Δαυείδ.

Ps. xx. 6 מְשִׁיחוֹ, LXX. (ἔσωσεν κύριος) τὸν χριστὸν αὐτοῦ.

Ps. xxviii. 8 מָעוּז יְשׁוּעוֹת מְשִׁיחוֹ הוּא, LXX. ὑπερασπιστὴς τῶν σωτηρίων τοῦ χριστοῦ αὐτοῦ ἐστίν.

So Ps. lxxxix. 38, 51, cxxxii. 10, 17.

Compare Ps. lxxxiv. 10 מְשִׁיחָךְ, אֱלֹהִים, LXX. ὁ θεός…τὸν χριστόν σου.

It occurs in the plural:

Ps. cv. 15, 1 Chron. xvi. 22 מְשִׁיחִי, LXX. οἱ χριστοί μου.

The full phrase is found:

Lam. iv. 20 מְשִׁיחִי יְהוָה, LXX. χριστὸς κύριος.

Compare Luke ii. 11.

It will be observed that in all these passages, with the exception of those in Leviticus, 2 Sam. i. 21, Dan. ix. 25 f., the Anointed One is always spoken of as the Anointed of the Lord or of God.

The title χριστός occurs in connexion with κύριος Ecclus. xlvi. 19 The use of ἐπεμαρτύρατο ἐναντίον κυρίου καὶ χριστοῦ. the term in later books.

It occurs several times also in the Psalms of Solomon:

xvii. 36 (there shall be no unrighteousness, because) πάντες ἅγιοι Psalms of καὶ βασιλεὺς αὐτῶν χριστὸς κύριος. Solomon.

xviii. 8 (happy are they who are) ὑπὸ ῥάβδον παιδείας χριστοῦ κυρίου ἐν φόβῳ θεοῦ αὐτοῦ ἐν σοφίᾳ πνεύματος καὶ δικαιοσύνης καὶ ἰσχύος.

It is found in the Book of Henoch:

Henoch.

c. 48, 10…they have denied the Lord of Spirits and His Anointed.

c. 52, 4 All these things which thou hast seen minister to the rule of His Anointed that he may be strong and mighty upon the earth.

And it occurs twice in the Targum of Onkelos on the Pentateuch:

Targums.

Gen. xlix. 10 עַד דִּיתִי מְשִׁיחָא דְּרִילְיָה הִיא מַלְכוּתָא, until Messiah come, whose is the kingdom.

Num. xxiv. 17 כְּדִיקוֹם מִלְכָּא מִיַּעֲקֹב וְיִתְרַבֵּא מִיַּשְׂחָא מִיַּשְׂרָאֵל, when a king shall arise from Jacob, and a Christ from Israel shall rule.

and commonly in the Targum of Jonathan. Comp. Buxtorf Lex. s. v.

It may be added that it is found also in 4 Esdras vii. 28 f. my Son Christ (comp. xii. 32).

And in the Apocalypse of Baruch: cc. xxiv, xxx. xxxix, xl, lxx, lxxii.

The use of the term in the New Testament a result of the study of Old Testament.

From this general view of the use of the word it appears that the limited application of the title to the Divine King and Saviour of Israel is, with the possible exception of the passage of Daniel, post-Biblical. And it is likely that the combination of the ideas of a coming of the Lord to judgment and of the establishment of a Divine Kingdom in Daniel served to concentrate attention on the scriptural language in regard to ’the Anointed of the Lord’ (Luke ii. 26) which was seen to transcend any past application. Thus it could not but be felt that every one anointed to a special function in the divine economy pointed to One greater in whom all that he foreshadowed should find a final accomplishment. The offices of king and priest and prophet were concentrated upon ’the Christ’; and now one office and now the other became predominant according to the tempers of men.

Use of the term by St John.

With regard to the usage of St John it may be observed that ὁ χριστός is without question uniformly an appellative (’the Christ,’ ’the Anointed’) in the Gospel: i. 20, 25, iii. 28, iv. 29, vii. 26 f., 31, 41 f., x. 24, xi. 27, xii. 34, xx. 31 (compare also the use of χριστός: i. 41, iv. 25, ix. 22). So it is also in the first epistle: ii. 22, v. 1. This large collection of examples seems to decide that the same sense must be adopted in 2 John 9; Apoc. xx. 4, 6, where otherwise the title might have seemed to be a proper name.

1 John 5:2

2. What then, it may be asked, is the sign of this spiritual love which is essentially different from a natural preference? The love of the children of God, such is the answer, is attested by the love of God, that is, by obedience to God. At first sight this answer seems simply to invert the terms of the statement which has been made already. The love of God and the love of the children of God do in fact include each the other. It is equally true to say ‘He who loves God loves the children of God,’ and to say ‘He who loves the children of God loves God.’ Either form of love may be made the ground or the conclusion in the argument. But in reality the test of the love of the brethren given here introduces a new idea. The will of Christians is essentially the will of God (comp. iii. 22). The effort to fulfil the commandments of God is consequently the effort to do that which our ‘brethren’ most desire to be done: the proof of love.

Bede says well: Ille solus recte proximum diligere probatur qui et Conditoris amore flagrare conspicitur.

It will also be further observed that the passage stands in close connexion with c. ii. 3 in this we perceive that we know Him if we keep His commandments; and with iii. 23 this is His commandment that we believe the Name…and love one another… (comp. iv. 20).

Obedience to the manifold commandments of God (αἱ ἐντολαί), the active fulfilment of Christian duty, is the sign of a knowledge of God: and knowledge of God is love of God.

And again, the one commandment of God (ἡ ἐντολή) is that we believe the Name of His Son and love one another.

Here the love of God and obedience in detail, which is identical with

2 ποιῶμεν B vg (me the syre): τηρῶμεν N (lat).

2, 3 om. ποιῶμεν…αὐτοῦ A.

it (v. 3), is given as the sign of the reality of love for the brethren, who are the children of God.

This thought that the love of God is obedience to His commandments is the uniting thought in the three passages. It is clearly seen through this how we can say (now more completely than before): ‘We love God and keep His commandments, and therefore we love the brethren’; or ‘We love the brethren, and therefore we love God and keep His commandments.’ Whichever proposition is established, the other follows from it. Comp. c. i. 3.

At the same time the transference of the test of the love of the brethren to a spiritual region enables the believer to discern (γινώσκομεν) the reality of his love in spite of the many differences which separate him from the object of it under the conditions of earthly life.

ἐν τούτῳ…] in this… The perception comes not as a conviction drawn from a state of obedient love (ἐκ τούτον, from this), but in the very exercise of the feeling. The ’this,’ as elsewhere, seems to look backward at once and forward, to the fact and to the manifestation of the love of God. Comp. ii. 3 note.

γινώσκομεν] cognoscimus V., me know, perceive. The conviction is brought home to us in the present interpretation of the facts of life. Compare ii. 3 note, 5, 18; iii. 24 (V. scimus); iv. 13 (V. intellegimus); and contrast the use of οἴδαμεν in iii. 2, 5, 14 f.; v. 15, 18 ff. (V. scimus, scilis). See v. 18 note. The use of ὅταν brings into prominence the immediate and continuous exercise of this power of knowledge.

ἀγαπῶμεν] The love which is spoken of is that of Christian for Christian as Christian, a feeling which has to be distinguished from human affection. Of this love, which belongs to the spiritual sphere, love to God, that is obedience to God, is necessarily a final criterion.

τὰ τέκνα τοῦ θ.] natos Dei V., the children of God. Comp. iii. 1 note. St John does not say ‘brethren’ here, because the argument turns upon the relation of Christians to God and not upon their relation to one another. At the same time the plural follows naturally on the singular of c. 1. Then the thought was of the individual realisation of the divine sonship: here the thought is of the general, social, duty.

This is the only place where ὅταν occurs in the Epistles of St John. With the present conj. it expresses either an action repeated indefinitely (John viii. 44, ix. 5, &c.), or an action at an indefinite time regarded as actually going on (John vii. 27 ἔρχεται, contrast v. 31 ἔλθῃ; xvi. 21 τίκτῃ followed by γεννήσῃ). Comp. 1 Cor. xv. 24 (παραδιδοί, καταργήσῃ).

ὅταν…ἀγαπῶμεν] cum…diligamus. V. The literal rendering ‘whenever we love’ makes the meaning clear. Each act of love to God, that is practically, each act of obedience, carries with it the fresh conviction of true love to the children of God. Ἐάν (c. ii. 3; John xiii. 35) gives the general condition: ὅταν, the particular and repeated fulfilment of it.

The change of order (comp. iii. 4) in the objects (ἀγαπ. τὰ τέκνα, ὅταν τὸν θ. ἀγαπ. καὶ τὰς ἐντ. ποι.) corresponds with a natural change in emphasis: ‘We know that we love the brethren, when God is the end of our affection and His commands the guide of our

³αὕτη γάρ ἐστιν ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ ἵνα τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ τηρώμεν, καὶ αἱ ἐντολαὶ αὐτοῦ βαρεῖαι οὐκ εἰσίν,

⁴ὅτι πᾶν τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ νικᾷ τὸν κόσμον.

action.’ In other cases where the object stands before the verb a similar shade of meaning is seen: e.g. ii. 20; iv. 9, 12; v. 9.

καὶ τὰς ἐντ. αὐτοῦ ποι.] et mandata eius faciamus V., and do His commandments. This clause brings the love of God into the region of active life. The phrase itself is unique (Apoc. xxii. 14 is a false reading); and seems to be chosen in order to express the active energy of obedience as positive and not only negative. Comp. c. i. 6 π. τὴν ἀλήθειαν note.

Augustine follows out his false interpretation of ‘him that is begotten of Him’ in v. 1 by a striking application here: Filios Dei dixit qui Filium Dei paulo ante dicebat, quia filii Dei corpus sunt unici Filii Dei; et cum ille caput nos membra unus est Filius Dei.

He also adds a wider application of the principle: Omnes homines, etiam inimicos vestros, diligatis, non quia sunt fratres, sed ut fratres sint; ut semper fraterno amore flagretis sive in fratrem factum, sive in inimicum ut frater fiat diligendo.

1 John 5:3

3. αὕτη γάρ…] for this… The words give an explanation of the second clause (and do His commandments) in the former verse. Love of God can only be shewn in the effort to fulfil His will. Comp. John xiv. 15, 21, 31.

ἵνα…τηρώμεν καὶ…] ut custodiamus V. The love of God is not simply the keeping (τήρησις, τὸ τηρεῖν) of the commandments of God, but rather a continuous and watchful endeavour to observe them. Comp. John vi. 29 ἵνα πιστεύητε, xvii. 3 ἵνα γιν.: 2 John 6. And the nature of the commandments is not such as to crush the freedom and spontaneity of love. They are not grievous, heavy (βαρεῖαι, gracia V.), an oppressive and exhausting burden. Compare Matt. xi. 30 τὸ φορτίον μου ἐλαφρόν ἐστιν, and contrast Matt. xxiii. 4 δεσμεύουσιν φορτία βαρέα.

1 John 5:4

4. ὅτι…] because… Comp. ii. 19 note. The fact that the divine commandments are not a burden is not established by a consideration of their character. In themselves they are difficult (Acts xiv. 22; John xvi. 33). To love the brethren is not a light thing. But with the commandment comes also the power of fulfilment. Natural taste, feeling, judgment may check spiritual sympathy; but every faculty and power which is quickened by God is essentially stronger than ’the world’ and realises its victory at once.

In the development of the thought St John passes from the abstract πᾶν τὸ γεγενν.) to the concrete and personal (τίς ἐστιν ὁ νικῶν), through the decisive history in which the truth was once for all absolutely realised (ἡ νίκη ἡ νικήσασα).

πᾶν τὸ γεγ.] St John chooses the abstract form (contrast v. 1 τὸν γεγ.) in order to convey an universal truth. The thought is not so much of the believer in his unity, nor of the Church, but of each element included in the individual life and in the life of the society. Compare John iii. 6 τὸ γεγ. and John iii. 8 πᾶς ὁ γεγ.

νικᾷ τὸν κ.] conquers the world—not ‘hath conquered’ (c. ii. 13 f., iv. 4), nor yet ‘will conquer’—in a struggle which is present and continuous. Under the title ’the world’ St John gathers up the sum of all the limited, transitory powers opposed to God which make obedience difficult. It

καὶ αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ νίκη ἡ νικήσασα τὸν κόσμον, ἡ πίστις ἡμῶν· ⁵τίς ἐστιν [δὲ] ὁ νικῶν τὸν κόσμον εἰ μὴ ὁ πιστεύων ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἐστὶν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ;

5 τίς ἐστιν δὲ B (lat); τίς δὲ ἐστιν B (lat) syrhl me: τίς ἐστιν A vg.

is by the introduction of the spiritual, the eternal, that we obtain a true standard for things, and so can overcome the temptations which spring out of a narrow, earthly, temporal estimate. And this holds good not only of man as a whole but of each power and faculty with which he is endowed. Comp. John xvi. 33.

καὶ αὕτη…] The certainty of the victory of that which partakes of the Divine is illustrated by a view of the nature of the victory itself. The victory which the Christian is ever winning is the individual appropriation of a victory gained once for all.

ἡ νίκη…ἡ πίστις ἡμῶν] the victory …our faith. The word νίκη occurs here only in the N.T., and πίστις here only in St John’s Epistles. Πίστις is not found in St John’s Gospel. It occurs in the Apocalypse: ii. 13, 19; xiii. 10; xiv. 12. In ii. 13, xiv. 12 it appears to be used objectively for ’the faith of Christ,’ as embodied in a confession (‘fides qua creditur’): in ii. 19, xiii. 10, it is the subjective spirit of the true believer (‘fides qua creditur’). Here the sense is fixed by the context. ‘Our faith’ is the faith which is summed up in the confession that Jesus is ’the Christ, the Son of God.’ The Life represented by that creed was the victory over the world as Christ Himself interpreted it (John xvi. 33). To hold that faith, to enter into the meaning and the power of that conquest through apparent failure, is to share in its triumph. Our faith is not merely victorious: it is the embodiment of the victory which overcame the world. Thus the aorist (ἡ νικήσασα, qua vincit V., inadequately) receives its full force. The victory of Christ was gained upon a narrow field, but it was world-wide in its effects. Comp. Ign. ad Sm. 10 ἡ τελεία πίστις, Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, and Col. ii. 2 εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν τοῦ μυστηρίου τοῦ θεοῦ, Χριστοῦ.

1 John 5:5

5. τίς ἐστιν…] At length the question becomes directly personal. St John appeals to the experience of those whom he addresses. The single believer (ὁ νικῶν) takes the place of the abstract element (τὸ γεγεννημένον), and of the absolute force (ἡ πίστις). The victory of the divine principle is, as he triumphantly claims, actually realised in the victory of the Christian.

τίς…εἰ μή…] Compare ii. 22. The personal victory is regarded in its course (ὁ νικῶν), as the representative victory was regarded in its completion (ἡ.ν. ἡ νικήσασα).

ὅτι Ἱ. ἐστὶν ὁ υἱ. τοῦ θ.] Comp. c. 1. By the use of the title ’the Son of God’ in connexion with the human name, Jesus, the antithesis involved in the faith is expressed in the sharpest form. There is a similar passage from ’the Christ’ to ’the Son’ in ii. 22 ff.

1 John 5:6

2. The Divine Witness (v. 6—12).

The victory of Faith has been shewn to lie in the confession of Jesus as the Son of God. St John now goes on to unfold the character (6—8), and the effectiveness (9—12), of the witness by which this confession is sustained and justified.

6—8. The character of the witness to the substance of the Christian Faith is laid open by a consideration of the historical witness which is offered to men in the Life of Christ, and

6 καὶ αἵματος B vg syrvg: + καὶ πνεύματος ΝΑ (lat) me the syrhl (others substitute πν. for αἵμ. and some read καὶ πν. καὶ αἵμ.).

Ἰς Χς ΝΑΒ: Χς Ἰς the: Ἰς ὁ Χς 5 syrhl. See Additional Note.

in the life of the Church (6 a, b); of the divine principle of witness (6 c); and of the personal witnesses (7, 8).

⁶ This is He that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood. And the Spirit is that which beareth witness, because the Spirit is the Truth. ⁷ Because three are they that bear witness, ⁸ the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are for the one.

6. The two parts of the historical witness to Christ are distinguished by the different forms in which the common outward symbols are used in corresponding clauses. He came ‘by water and blood,’ and again ’not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood.’

Οὗτος…] The pronoun goes back to the subject of the last sentence. “This ‘Jesus,’ who has been affirmed to be ’the Son of God,’ is He that came…” The compound title at the end of the clause, Jesus Christ, emphasises the truth which is established by the manner of the ‘coming’ of ‘Jesus’: ‘This is He that came…’ and whose Divine Office is expressed by the full name which He bears, even Jesus Christ.

ὁ ἐλθών…] He that came… The verb is used with a clear reference to the technical sense of ‘he that cometh’ (ὁ ἐρχόμενος Matt. xi. 3; Luke vii. 19 f.; comp. John i. 15, 27; vi. 14; xi. 27; xii. 13; see also John i. 30; x. 8). Thus ‘He that came’ is equivalent to ‘He that fulfilled the promises to the fathers, as the Saviour sent from God.’ Comp. ii. 18 note.

δι’ ὕδατος καὶ αἵματος] per aquam et sanguinem V., by (through) water and blood. The sense of ‘He that came,’ which distinctly points to a past historic fact, determines that these terms also must have a historic meaning, and refer to definite events characteristic of the manner in which the Lord fulfilled His office upon earth. ‘He came—He was shewn to be the Christ—by water and blood.’ ‘Water’ and ‘blood’ contributed in some way to reveal the nature and the fulfilment of His work.

There can be no doubt that the Death upon the Cross satisfies the conception of ‘coming by blood.’ By so dying the Lord made known His work as Redeemer; and opened the fountain of His life to men. Comp. Additional Note on i. 7.

The ‘coming by water,’ which naturally corresponds to this final act of sacrifice, is the Baptism, whereby the Lord declared His purpose ’to fulfil all righteousness’ (Matt. iii. 15). The water, by Christ’s voluntary acceptance of the Baptist’s ministry, became the means through which the divine purpose was fulfilled (Matt. iii. 17). The Baptist was sent baptizing in water that Christ might be made manifest (John i. 31). Even in the case of the Lord Baptism is shewn to have been the external condition of the ‘descent and abiding of the Holy Spirit’ (John i. 33 f.); and by His Baptism Christ fulfilled for the humanity which He took to Himself, though not for Himself, the condition of regeneration.

But we cannot stop at the reference to the cardinal events in the Lord’s Life whereby He ‘came by water and blood’ in the fulfilment of

His historic work. While He hung upon the Cross, dead in regard to mortal life, but still living (see John xix. 34 note), He came again ‘by water and blood.’ The issue of ‘blood and water’ from His side evidently indicated that He henceforth became for men the source of blessing symbolised by the twofold stream, and realised in His own human life by Baptism and Death upon the Cross. The one historic coming was shewn to be the foundation of a continuous spiritual coming; and St John saw in this the subject of the crucial testimony which he had to give (John xix. 35).

Compare the fragment of Claudius Apollinaris (Routh, Rell. i. 161) ὁ ἐκχέας ἐκ τῆς πλευρᾶς αὐτοῦ τὰ δύο πάλιν καθόρσια ὕδωρ καὶ αἷμα, λόγον καὶ πνεῦμα (the Gospel of the Incarnate Word and the sanctifying presence of the Spirit).

This exceptional note of the Evangelist seems to place the reference here to the significant fact recorded in the Gospel beyond question. The readers of the Epistle could not but be familiar with the incident either from the oral or from the written teaching of the Apostle; and conscious of the stress which he laid upon it, as the confirmation of Christian faith, they could not fail to recall it here.

Compare Bede: Nec reticendum quod in hoc quoque sanguis et aqua testimonium illi dederunt quod de latere mortui vivaciter effluverunt, quod erat contra naturam corporum mortuorum, atque ob id mysteriis aptum et testimonio veritatis fuit congruum, videlicet insinuans quia et ipsum Domini corpus melius post mortem esset victurum resuscitatum in gloria et ipsa mors illius nobis vitam donaret.

Such an extension of the meaning of ‘water and blood’ appears to be implied in the words that follow: not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood, followed by the reference to the present witness of the Spirit. The change of the preposition, the use of the article, and the stress laid on actual experience, shew that St John is speaking of a continuation of the first coming under some new but analogous form. Further it is to be noticed that what was before spoken of in its unity (δὲ ὕ, καὶ αἷ) is now spoken of in its separate parts (ἐν τῷ ὕ, καὶ ἐν τῷ αἷμ.). The first proof of the Messiahship of Jesus lay in His complete historical fulfilment of Messiah’s work once for all in bringing purification and salvation: that proof is continued in the experience of the Church in its two separate parts.

Thus we are led to the ideas which underlie the two sacraments, and which are brought home to us in and through them: the ideas which in their most general form are laid open in John iii., vi. It is through Christ’s ‘coming by water and blood,’ and His Life through Death, that the life of the Spirit and the cleansing and support of our human life in all its fulness are assured. The actual experience of these blessings is the abiding witness of the Church to Him.

Bede, probably following Augustine, whose Commentary is not extant after v. 3, well combines the historic and sacramental references: Quἱ venit per aquam et sanguinem, aquam videlicet lavaeri et sanguinem suae passionis: non solum baptizari propter nostram ablutionem dignatus est, ut nobis baptismi sacramentum consecraret ac traderet, verum etiam sanguinem suum dedit pro nobis, sua nos passione redimens, cujus sacramentis semper refecti nutriremur ad salutem.

διὰ…ἐν…] The historic Mission of Christ—the pledge of His Presence—was established ’through’ the cardinal events of His Ministry. The abiding Presence of Christ—the issue of His Mission—is realised ‘in’ that which is appointed to perpetuate

Χριστός· οὐκ ἐν τῷ ὕδατι μόνον ἀλλ’ ἐν τῷ ὕδατι καὶ ἐν τῷ αἵματι· καὶ τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν τὸ μαρτυροῦν, ὅτι τὸ μόνον: μόνον B. αἵματι RB vg me the syrr: πνεύματι A (some add πνεύματι, others read αἵματι…πνεύματι). τὸ πνεῦμα (2°): Χριστός vg. Perhaps xpc for sps. (Not Ambr. Fulg.)

the power of His work. The one preposition marks the means by which Christ’s office was revealed: the other the sphere in which He continues to exercise it.

δι’ ὕδατος καὶ αἵμ.] The order is significantly changed from that in the Gospel (blood and water). The order in the Gospel is (so to speak) the order of the divine gift: the full power of human life comes first: that in the Epistle is the order of the human appropriation of the gift.

The symbolism of ‘blood’ as representing the natural human life sacrificed and so made available for others, has been already touched upon. In contrast with this, ‘water’ represents the power of the spiritual life: John iii. 5; iv. 14; vii. 38 (Zech. xiv. 8). Comp. Apoc. xxi. 6; xxii. 1,17.

οὐκ ἐν τῷ ὕδ. μ.] not in the water only. The reference is probably to such teachers as Irenæus mentions (i. 26, 1): [Cerinthus docuit] post baptismum descendisse in eum (Iesum) ab ea principalitate quæ est super omnia Christum figura columbæ; et tunc annunciasse incognitum Patrem et virtutes perfecisse: in fine autem revolasse iterum Christum de Jesu et Jesum passum esse et resurrexisse; Christum autem impassibilem perseverasse, existentem spiritalem. In some form or other the same kind of error is always repeating itself. The spiritual life is exalted into an undue supremacy, to the neglect of the redemption of the earthly life.

For this reason St John says οὐκ ἐν τῷ ὕδ. μόνον, and not οὐ δι’ ὕδ. μόνον. He contradicts a false view of Christ’s abiding work and not only a false view of Christ’s Person in Himself.

καὶ τὸ πν…] and the Spirit… In the words which immediately precede St John has indicated a present action of Christ. He now shews how the reality of that action is established. The Spirit—the Divine Spirit—is that which witnesseth, not ‘which witnessed’ (3 John 6), or ‘which hath witnessed’ (v. 9). His testimony is given now and uninterruptedly. Such ‘witness’ is the peculiar office of the Spirit (John xiv. 26; xv. 26; xvi. 8 ff.). By this it is that men are enabled to pierce beneath the external phenomena and the external rites to their innermost meaning. Nothing is said of the substance of the witness or of those to whom it is given. These details are included in the idea of the Spirit’s witness. He speaks of Divine Truth; and He speaks to the souls of believers.

Thus there is, as will be seen, a striking parallelism between the office of Christ and the office of the Spirit. Jesus is He that came, once for all fulfilling the Messiah’s work; and the Spirit is that which beareth witness, ever applying and interpreting His Mission and His gifts.

ὅτι τὸ πνεῦμα…] quoniam (quod) Christus V., because the Spirit… The conjunction (ὅτι) has been interpreted both as giving the substance (that) and as giving the reason (because) of the testimony. The former translation gives no tolerable sense unless the Latin reading of Christ for the Spirit is adopted. But the sense thus gained is foreign to the context. While then we take the translation because as certainly right, the meaning of the word is ambiguous here. It may mean: The Spirit gives the witness (1) be-

7 τρεῖς: οἱ τρεῖς 8. 7, 8 See Additional Note.

cause it is essentially fitted to do so: or (2) because by its essential nature it is constrained to do so. Perhaps the one idea passes into the other, so that it is not necessary to distinguish them sharply. In that which is Divine, nature and office coincide.

τὸ πν. ἐστιν ἡ ἀλ.] the Spirit is the Truth. Just as Christ is the Truth (John xiv. 6), so the Spirit sent in Christ’s name is the Truth. The Spirit cannot but make known, as men can bear the revelation, that which is eternal and absolute in changing phenomena. That which ‘is’ is in virtue of the Spirit, in virtue of Christ (Col. i. 15 ff.).

Bede has a vigorous note on the Latin reading (Christus est veritas): Quia ergo Spiritus Jesum Christum esse veritatem testatur, ipse se veritatem cognominat, Baptista illum veritatem prædicat, Filius tonitrui veritatem evangelizat: taceant blasphemi qui hunc phantasma esse dogmatizant; pereant de terra memoriae corum qui eum vel Deum vel hominem esse verum denegant.

7, 8. ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσίν…] Because three are they… This clause appears to give the reason for the main proposition in v. 5, that ‘Jesus is the Son of God,’ a truth briefly expressed and affirmed by His full Name, ‘Jesus Christ.’ What has been said in v. 6 —this is He that came—prepares the way for the assertion of this complete personal testimony, adequate according to the human standard: Deut. xix. 15; comp. John viii. 17 ff. The stress laid by the order upon ’three’ emphasises this thought of the fulness of the number of the witnesses, and the consequent certainty of that which they affirm. The faith in Jesus as ’the Christ, the Son of God’ is reasonable according to the ordinary laws of belief.

It seems to be less natural to regard the clause as a confirmation of the words which immediately precede. The ground of the Spirit’s witness is given perfectly in the declaration of His Nature and Office as ’the Truth.’ Yet it is possible that the ὅτι may simply explain the addition of the Spirit: “besides ’the Water’ and ’the Blood’ there is yet another witness: because three are they that bear witness.” τρεῖς…οἱ μαρτυροῦντες] The passage from the neuter τὸ μαρτυροῦν to the masculine οἱ μαρτυροῦντες marks the different aspect under which the witness is now regarded, as a personal witness. The transition is made through the Spirit, who is regarded both as a power and as a person: comp. John xiv. 26; xv. 26, τὸ πνεῦμα…ὅ…ἐκεῖνος. Just as the Spirit is found to be personal in His work with men, so also ’the water’ and ’the blood’ speak personally through those in whom their efficacy is realised.

οἱ μαρτ.] The participle, as distinguished from the noun οἱ μάρτυρες (Acts i. 8; ii. 32, &c.), expresses the actual delivery of the witness, and this as a present, continuous, action. The witness here is considered mainly as the living witness of the Church and not as the historical witness of the Gospels. Through believers these three, ’the Spirit and the Water and the Blood,’ perform a work not for believers only but for the world (John xvii. 20 ff.).

Additional Note on v. 6. References to the facts of the Gospel.

Reference to the fact of the Gospel in the Epistles of St John.

The Epistles of St John are permeated with the thoughts of the Person and work of Christ but direct references to the facts of the Gospel are singularly rare in them. In the third Epistle there is nothing in the language which is distinctively Christian except the pregnant reference to ’the Name’ (e. 7). The Baptism is not spoken of plainly; nor yet any one of the crucial events of the Life of the Lord which were included in the earliest Confessions of faith, the Birth of the Virgin Mary, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, the Ascension, the Session at the right hand of the Father, the Coming to Judgment.

But though these facts are not expressly mentioned they are all implied, and interpreted. Without them the arguments and language of St John are unintelligible.

1. (1) The Birth of the Virgin Mary: iv. 2 Jesus Christ came in flesh. 2. (2) The Baptism: v. 6 This is He that came by water.

(3) The Passion: iii. 16 He laid down His life for us—v. 6 This is He that came…by blood.

(4) The Resurrection, Ascension and Session at the right hand of the Father: ii. 1 we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ. Comp. 2 John 7…confess that Jesus Christ cometh in flesh; 1 John i. 3.

(5) The coming to Judgment: ii. 28 that we may have boldness and not be ashamed before Him at His presence; iii. 2 If He should be manifested we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is. 2 John 7.

In addition to these allusions to articles of the Baptismal Creed the first Epistle assumes a general knowledge of the Life and Teaching of Christ: ii. 6 He that saith he abideth in Him ought himself also to walk even as He walked; iii. 1 The world knoweth us not because it knew Him not; ii. 25 the promise which He promised; iii. 23 as He gave us commandment. Compare also i. 1 note.

The revelation of the purpose and issue of Christ’s work is made with singular fulness:

iii. 5 He was manifested to take away sins.

— 8 The Son of God was manifested that He might destroy the works of the devil.

iv. 9 [God] hath sent His Son, His only Son, that we may live through Him.

— 10 [God] sent His Son, as a propitiation for our sins. Comp. ii. 2.

— 14 The Father hath sent the Son as Saviour of the world.

v. 20 The Son of God is come and hath given us an understanding that we may know Him that is true.

Comp. i. 7; v. 18.

Additional Note on the readings in v. 6 f.

The variations of the three chief Greek MSS in the passage οὗτος…μαρτυροῦντες deserve to be studied in detail. Happily in this case the common text follows in the main that of B.

B.

B.

A.

For τὸ πνεῦμα the Latin Vulgate gives Christus.

1 John 5:7

Additional Note on the readings in v. 7, 8.

The interpolated gloss.

The words which are interpolated in the common Greek text in this passage (ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ ὁ πατὴρ ὁ λόγος καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα· καὶ οὗτοι αἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσι. καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν αἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῇ γῇ) offer an instructive illustration of the formation and introduction of a gloss into the apostolic text without any signs of bad faith. Happily the gloss was confined within narrow limits till the age of printing. If it had been known in the East in the sixth or seventh century, it is not rash to suppose that it would have found wide acceptance just as it did in the printed editions of the Greek text, and the evidence would have been complicated though essentially unchanged. In this respect the history of the Vulgate reading is of singular importance. The mass of later Latin copies which contain the interpolation obviously add nothing to the evidence in favour of the authenticity of the words, and do not even tend to shew that they formed part of Jerome’s text.

The state of the external evidence can be summed up very briefly.

Summary of external evidence.

The words are not found

(1) In any independent Greek MS (more than 180 MSS and 50 lectionaries are quoted). Both the late MSS which contain it have unquestionably been modified by the Latin Vulgate¹. (2) In any independent Greek writer. The very few Greek writers who make use of the words derived their knowledge of them from the Latin (not in Ir Cl.Al Orig Did Athan Bas Greg.Naz Cyr.Al)². (3) In any Latin Father earlier than Victor Vitensis or Vigilius Tapsensis (not in Tert Cypr Hil Ambr Hier Aug Leo 1³). (4) In any ancient version except the Latin; and it was not found (a) in the Old Latin in its early form (Tert Cypr Aug), or (b) in the Vulgate as issued by Jerome (Codd. am fald) or (c) as revised by Aleuin (Cod. callicell*)⁴.

On the other hand the gloss is found from the sixth century in Latin Fathers; and it is found also in two copies which give an old Latin text, in some early copies of the Vulgate and in the great mass of the later copies and in the Clementine text.

It becomes of interest therefore to observe how the words originally

¹ The Codex Raviamus which was formerly quoted as a MS authority has been shewn to be a copy made from printed texts, chiefly from the Complutensian, which it follows in this passage. Comp. Griesbach, N.T. I. ii. App. 4 f. The clause is also written on the margin of a Naples MS 173 ‘manu recenti, unius ut mihi videtur ex bibliothecariis, sec. fine 17’ (Tischdf.).

² The gloss of Claudius Apollinaris, quoted in the note on the text, shews that he connected ’the word’ and ’the spirit’ with v. 8 in a different sense.

³ Compare Griesbach l. c. 13 ff.

⁴ The words are found in the Theodulfian Recension (Paris Bibl. Nat. Lat. 9380) in the following form: quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra spiritus aqua et sanguis et tres unum sunt; et tres sunt qui testimonium dicunt in cælo pater et filius, et spiritus sanctus et hi tres unum sunt (Prof. Wordsworth).

found a place in the Latin texts, and were carried from that source into the Greek text, and into the printed editions of other versions.

The words are not, as has been already stated, found in any early Latin Father; but a passage of Cyprian, which shews that he was not acquainted with them as part of the apostolic text, shews at the same time how natural it was to form a distinct gloss on v. 7 according to their tenor: Dicit dominus: Ego et Pater unum sumus; et iterum de Patre et Filio et Spiritu Sancto scriptum est; et tres unum sunt (de Eccles. unit. c. 6; comp. auct. de rebapt. cc. 15, 19). The force of this application of ’the spirit and the water and the blood’ with the false reading ‘unum sunt’ for ‘in unum sunt’ (εἰς τὸ ἓν εἰσιν) is made clear by a later reference to it in Facundus:…De Patre et Filio et Spiritu Sancto sic dicit: Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, spiritus, aqua et sanguis, et hi tres unum sunt; in spiritu significans Patrem, sicut Dominus mulieri Samaritanae… loquitur…in aqua vero Spiritum Sanctum significans sicut in eodem Evangelio exponit (John vii. 37)…in sanguine vero Filium…Quod… Johannis apostoli testimonium beatus Cyprianus…in epistola sive libro quem de Unitate scripsit de Patre Filio et Spiritu Sancto dictum intelligit (Pro def. tr. Cap. i. 3). The same mystical interpretation is found in Augustine (c. Maxim. ii. 22), and Eucherius (Instruc. i. ad loc. Migne, Patr. Lat. l. 810); and Augustine supplies the word ‘Verbum,’ which is required to complete the gloss: Deus itaque summus et verus cum Verbo suo et Spiritu Sancto, quæ tria unum sunt, Deus unus et onnipotens (de Civ. v. 11¹).

The gloss which had thus become an established interpretation of St John’s words is first quoted as part of the Epistle in a group of writings which come from Africa in the last quarter of the fifth century:

(1) Ut adhuc luce clarius unius divinitatis esse cum Patre et Filio Spiritum Sanctum doceamus, Joannis Evangelistae testimonio comprobatur. Ait namque Tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in celo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus Sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt (Prof. Fid. ap. Vict. Vit. de Persec. Vand. iii. 11²). (2) Pater est ingenitus, filius vero sine initio genitus a patre est, spiritus autem sanctus processit (Casp. procedit!) a patre et accipit de filio

¹ It is by no means unlikely that the mystical interpretation of v. 8 may have taken a definite shape in Africa from a very early time. The language of Tertullian, which shews conclusively that he was not acquainted with the words tres unum sunt as a scriptural phrase, indicates the beginning of its growth: adv. Prax. 25…connexus patris in filio et filii in paracleto, tres efficit coherentes, alterum ex altero. Qui tres unum sunt non unus; quomodo dictum est ego et pater unum sumus (John x. 30) ad substantiæ unitatem, non ad numeri singularitatem. It is possible that the gloss may have found a place in copies of the Latin Version as soon as it was definitely shaped; but there is no evidence that it was found in the text of St John before the latter part of the 5th century.

² The authorship of this ‘Exposition of the Faith’ is uncertain. It is perhaps a later addition to the history of Victor (Papencordt, Gesch. d. Vand. Herrsch. 369 n.); but in no case does it prove more than that the words were found in the copy of the Epistle used by the writer.

sicut evangelista testatur, quia scriptum est: Tres sunt qui dicunt testimonium in cælo, pater, verbum et spiritus, et hoc tria unum sunt, in Christo Jesu. Non tamen dixit: unus est in Christo Jesu¹.

It was not unnatural that in the stress of the Arian persecution words which were held to give the plain meaning of St John’s words as they were read should find their way from the margin into the text, or if they had already obtained a place in the text of any copies should gain wider currency. But still the form is fluent:

(3) [Johannes Evangelista] ad Parthos: Tres sunt, inquit, qui testimonium perhibent in terra, aqua sanguis et caro, et tres in nobis sunt; et tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in cælo, Pater Verbum et Spiritus…et hi (ii) tres unum sunt (c. Varim. 5). And again: (4)…dicente Joanne Evangelista in epistola sua: Tres sunt qui testimonium dicunt in cælo, Pater et Verbum et Spiritus; et in Christo Jesu unum sunt, non tamen unus est, quia non est in his una persona (de Trin. i. p. 206; Migne, Patr. Lat. lxii. 243).

From this time the words seem to have maintained partially their position in the text. They are quoted by Fulgentius (c. 550) as St John’s in the form: Tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in cælo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus; et tres unum sunt (Resp. c. Arian. p. 68, Migne, Patr. Lat. lxv. 224); though the same writer in another place (c. Fabian. fragm.) speaks of the application of the clause et tres unum sunt to ’the Father, Son and Holy Spirit’ as established by argument, a process wholly unnecessary if the gloss had been admitted as part of the text.

On the other hand the language of Cassiodorus (c. 550) seems to me to shew that he did not find the gloss in his text of St John, though he accepted it as a true interpretation of the apostle’s words. Cui rei [quia Jesus est Christus], he writes, testificantur in terra tria mysteria, aqua sanguis et spiritus, quæ in passione Domini leguntur impleta; in cælo autem Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus; et hi tres unus est Deus (Complex. in Epp. ad loc. Migne, Patr. Lat. lxx. pp. 1372 f.)².

Not long afterwards the addition was expressly defended in ‘a Prologue to the seven canonical Epistles’ issued under the name of Jerome, which seems to have been written with this express purpose: [In prima Johannis Epistola] ab infidelibus translatoribus multum erratum esse a fidei veritate comperimus, trium tantum vocabula, hoc est, aquæ sanguinis et spiritus, in ipsa sua editione ponentibus et Patris, Verbique ac Spiritus testimonium omittentibus; in quo maxime et fides catholica roboratur et Patris ac Filii ac Spiritus Sancti una divinitatis substantia comprobatur (Migne, Patrol. Lat. xxix. 829 f.).

This Prologue is found in one of the earliest copies of the Vulgate (Codex Fuldensis) written in 546, though the gloss itself is not found in the text of the Epistle.

¹ This remarkable form of the gloss has been printed by Caspari in an Expositio fidei preserved in the Ambrosian ms which contains also the Muratorian fragment on the Canon (Kirchenhist. Anecdota, pp. xxiv. 305 and notes).

² The passage of Cassiodorus is well discussed by Bp Turton in his Vindication of Porson, pp. 179 ff.

Expressly affirmed to be authentic.

But the gloss is found in early MSS both of the Old Latin and of the Vulgate, and in substantially the same form, so that it must have been introduced into both from the same source. These are (a) (of the old Latin) a Speculum (a classified series of Scriptural passages) m (sæc. viii. or ix.) and a Munich fragment q (cod. Fris. sæc. vi. or vii.); (b) of the Vulgate, the Spanish (Visigothic) MSS Cod. Cav. (sæc. ix.) and Cod. Tol. (sæc. x.).

The whole passage appears in these authorities in the following form:

| Cod. Fris.^{1} | Spec. (m). | Codd. Cav. Tol. | | — | — | — | | quoniam tr | quoniam tres sunt qui testimonium dicunt | quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant | | in terra | in terra | in terra | | spiritus et aqua et sa | spiritus aqua et sanguis; | spiritus et aqua et sanguis; | | | et hi tres unum sunt in Christo Jesu. | et hi tres unum sunt in Christo Jesu. | | | Et tres sunt | et (om Tol) tres sunt | | tificantur | qui testimonium dicunt | qui testimonium dicunt | | in caelo | in caelo | in caelo | | pater e | Pater verbum et spiritus | pater verbum et spiritus | | tres unum sunt. | et hi tres unum sunt. | et hi tres unum sunt. |

Here, it will be observed, the testimony on earth is placed first, so that the heavenly testimony retains its position as an interpretative gloss². And there is also a second similar though shorter gloss in Christo Jesu which is even older than that which follows; for it is indicated in the Latin translation of the Outlines of Clement of Alexandria: et hi tres unum sunt: in salvatore quippe istæ sunt virtutes salutiferæ, et vita ipsa in ipso Filio ejus existit (p. 1011 P.).

After a time the second gloss in Christo Jesu was omitted; and the two clauses were transposed; so that the passage assumed the form which was generally current in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and was finally pronounced authentic in the Sixtine and Clementine editions of the Vulgate. The main forms in which the passage appears in the Latin texts are given in the following table:

¹ The MS is unfortunately mutilated. About half of each line is lost. The lines of the MS so far as they are preserved run thus:

quiaspsestueritas qmtr in terra . spsetaquaetsa tificanturincælop tere tresunumsunt sitestim

There is room in each line for about 21 more letters. It is not possible therefore that the words et hi tres unum sunt in Christo Jesu could have formed part of the text. It is further to be noticed that this MS reads spiritus in v. 6 for Christus.

² Another form of the reading preserved in the St Gall MS: Quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant spiritus et aqua et sanguis, et tres unum sunt. Sicut in cælo tres sunt, Pater Verbum et Spiritus, et tres unum sunt (Dobbin, Codex Montfort. p. 45), points clearly to the original gloss-form of the addition. This reading is given in a MS in the British Museum (Add. 11,852. See Dict. of Bible, Vulgate, p. 1713 n. q). A Greek MS has notes in v. 8 τοντέστι τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ ὁ πατὴρ καὶ αὐτὸς ἑαυτοῦ and on ἐν εἰσι: τοντέστι μία θεότης, εἰς θεός (Tischdf. ad loc.).

Cod. Car.

quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, spiritus et aqua et sanguis; et hi tres unum sunt in Christo Jesu et tres sunt qui testimonium dicunt in caelo, pater verbum et spiritus; et hi tres unum sunt.

Cod. Vallicell.** quoniam tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, spiritus aqua et sanguis; et tres unum sunt sicut tres sunt qui testimonium dant in caelo, pater verbum et spiritus sanctus; et tres unum sunt.

Common Text.

quoniam tres sunt qui testimonium dant in caelo, pater verbum et spiritus sanctus; et hi tres unum sunt. et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, spiritus et aqua et sanguis; et hi tres unum sunt¹.

The first appearance of the words in Greek.

Here the history of the Latin interpolation ends: we have to notice how it passed into the Greek text. It appears first in a Greek version of the Acts of the Council of Lateran held in 1215, coeval with the Council. The Latin text is: Quemadmodum in canonica Johannis epistola legitur: Quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant in cælo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus Sanctus; et hi tres unum sunt. Statimque subjungitur: et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, spiritus aqua et sanguis; et tres unum sunt, sicut in quibusdam codicibus legitur². For this the corresponding Greek, as far as it has been preserved, is: ὃν τρόπον ἐν τῇ κανονικῇ τοῦ Ἰωάννου ἐπιστολῇ ἀναγινώσκεται ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μυρτυροῦντες ἐν οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, λόγος καὶ πνεῦμα ἅγιον καὶ τοῦτοι (sic) οἱ τρεῖς ἓν εἰσιν. εὐθὺς τε προστίθησι *** καθὼς ἓν τισι κώδηξιν εὑρίσκεται.

The clause was quoted afterwards incompletely by Manuel Calecas (sæc. xiv.), and perhaps by Jos. Bryennius (sæc. xv.), who both wrote under Latin influence; and at last it found a place in a Graeco-Latin MS of the Epistle (Cod. Vat. Ottob. 162) of the fifteenth century, and in a Greek MS of the sixteenth century (Cod. Montfort. Dubl. 34, the Codex Britannicus of Erasmus). The Greek text in both these MSS has been adapted in other places to the Latin Vulgate; and in this passage both follow a late Latin text in omitting the εἰς τὸ ἓν εἰσι after the earthly witness. The language of both, especially that of Cod. Montfort., shews decisively that the Greek is a translation of the Latin³.

The passage is thus given in the two MSS:

¹ This last clause is omitted in many late MSS. Some account of the Latin MSS known up to his time is given by Ep Turton, l. c. pp. 141 f. Griesbach l. c. 12 calculates that the gloss is omitted by 50—60 MSS of the Vulgate. In collections which he mentions it is omitted by 18 MSS out of an aggregate of 234.

² This remark refers to the last words et tres unum sunt which were omitted by many late MSS of the Vulgate.

³ It has been shewn by Dr Dobbin that Cod. Montf. is ‘a transcript with arbitrary and fanciful variations’ of the MS in Lincoln College, Oxford 39, in which the gloss is not found (Codex Montfortianus, p. 57).

Cod. Montf. (34).

Cod. Vat. Ottob. (162).

quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant in caelo, pater verbum et spiritus sanctus:

et hi tres unum sunt.

et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, spiritus aqua et sanguis si testimonium.

The Complutensian editors introduced another translation of the Vulgate similar to that in Cod. 162, into their text¹. Meanwhile Erasmus had published his first edition giving the whole passage as he found it in his Greek MS with the note: In Graeco codice tantum hoc reperio de testimonio triplici ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσὶν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα; and on the clause et hi tres unum sunt, which he retained in his translation, he writes: Hi redundat: Neque est unum sed in unum, εἰς τὸ αὐτό. i. sive in idem. In his third edition, in fulfilment of a promise which he had made to insert the clause if it could be shewn to exist in a single Greek MS, he inserted the words on the authority of the Cod. Montfort. retaining however the words καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἓν εἰσιν.

The words were afterwards brought into a more correct shape without any manuscript authority; and at last the passage assumed the form which is given in the texts of Stephanus in 1550 and Elzevir of 1633 (’text. rec.’), and from them has assumed general currency.

The chief forms in which the whole passage appears in early printed texts are given in the following table:

Erasm. Ed. 1, 1516.

Erasm. Ed. 3, 1522.

Erasm. Ed. 4, 1527.

¹ The ἀπὸ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ in the Greek text of Cod. 162 is very peculiar. Is it possible that ἐπὶ has been misread ἀπό, as was done in the corresponding clause, and that the translator intended ἐπὶ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ to answer exactly to ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς?

The introduction of the gloss into the printed Greek text.

Ed. Compl. 1514 (Cod. Rae..

Erasm. Ed. 3, 1522.

Ed. Steph. 1550; Elz. 1633 (text rec.).

When the gloss had gained a place in the Greek text it naturally influenced the texts of other versions. Gutbir and Schaaf introduced with very slight modifications a translation which had been made by Tremellius into their printed texts of the Peshito². It was introduced into editions of the Armenian and Slavonic Versions; and into the modern European versions.

The supposed dogmatic importance of the gloss has given a value to the evidence in its favour out of all proportion to its critical weight. The MS authority, for example, for the spurious Epistle to the Laodicenes is essentially the same. This also is supported by m, and by the La Cava and Toledo MSS and by a multitude of later MSS of the Vulgate. In the preceding verse (r. 6) of the Epistle almost all Latin authorities read Christus

¹ A note is added which seems to shew that the editors found the following clause καὶ—εἰσὶν in their Greek MSS: Sanctus Thomas in expositione secundae desretalis de sermone Trinitate et Fide Catholica tractans istum passum contra Abbatem Joachim viz. Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in ciclo, pater verbum et spiritus sanctus, dicit ad litteram verba sequentia. Et ad insinuandam unitatem trium personarum subditur, et hii tres unum sunt. Quod quidem dicitur propter essentiae unitatem. Sed hoc Joachim perverse trahere volens ad unitatem charitatis et consensus inducetat consequentem auctoritatem. Nam subditur ibidem: et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra S. spiritus aqua et sanguis. Et in quibusdam libris additur: et hii tres unum sunt. Sed hoc in veris exemplaribus non habetur: sed dicitur esse appositum ab hereticis Arrianis ad pervertendum intellectum sanum auctoritatis præmissæ de unitate essentiae trium personarum. Hæc beatus Thomas ubi supra.

This is, as far as I have observed, the only note of the kind in the New Testament. The treatment of the passage is wholly exceptional; for elsewhere the Edition marks prominently in the Greek text the absence of Latin additions: e.g. Acts viii. 37, ix. 5, 6, x. 6, xiv. 7, xv. 41; 1 John ii. 23; 2 John 11; and conversely the absence of words found in the Greek text from the Latin: e.g. Acts x. 21, 32, xv. 24; 1 Pet. iii. 12, iv. 14; 1 John v. 13.

² Gutbir’s note is worth quoting: Cum notum sit Arrianos nec ipsi Greco Textui nec Versionibus Orientalibus hic pepercisse, ex Notis Tremellii hunc versum in aliis E. E. desideratum adscripsimus. Schaaf’s note is to the same effect.

for Spiritus (τὸ πνεῦμα). A remarkable group of ancient authorities of the same type including Cod. Tol. add to c. ii. 17 quomodo Deus manet in aeternum. In c. v. 20, m and Cod. Tol., with Hilary substantially, add a clause very similar in character to the gloss on r. 8; and in the same verse m Cod. Montf. with the Latvg (Hil Ambr Vigil Fulg Leo) read simus (ὤμεν).

It will also have been observed that the gloss itself sprang from a false reading unum for in unum, a change due to an omission which was equally easy in Greek (τρεῖς εἰς) and in Latin.

1 John 5:8

8. τὸ πνεῦμα] The Spirit has a twofold office, one corresponding with that of Christ (οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἐλθών… τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν τὸ μαρτυροῦν…); and

9 τῶν ἀνθρ.: τοῦ θεοῦ ℵ.

ὅτι (2°) ℵAB vg me the: ἦν 5.

the other coordinate with that of the power of spiritual life and the power of redemption brought by Christ (τὸ πν., τὸ ὕδωρ, τὸ αἷμα). In this latter connexion it must be remembered that the Spirit is the sign of the glory of the Risen Christ; John vii. 39; xvi. 7; Acts ii. 32 f. Thus the Spirit, with the Water and Blood, completes the witness to the Incarnation as a Fact no less than as an open source of blessing. For the witness of the Spirit see Acts v. 32.

οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἔν εἰσιν] the three are for the one. The subject is emphatically repeated to mark the unity of the object. ‘The three personal witnesses are turned to the one absolute end,’ to establish the one Truth (τὸ ἔν, the one, not simply one), that definite Truth which is everywhere present through the Epistle. The idea is not that of simple unanimity in the witnesses (εἰς ἐν εἶναι), but that of their convergence (so to speak) on the one Gospel of ‘Christ come in the flesh,’ to know which is eternal life.

With the phrase εἰς τὸ ἐν εἶναι may be contrasted ἐν εἶναι John x. 30; xvii. 21 f.; 1 Cor. iii. 8; τελειοῦσθαι εἰς ἐν John xvii. 23; συνάγειν εἰς ἐν John xi. 52.

1 John 5:9

9—12. St John goes on from considering the character of the witness to Christ to consider its effectiveness. It is a divine witness (9): it is a human, internal witness (10): it is a witness realised in a present life (11), in fellowship with the Son (12).

⁹ If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater, because this is the witness of God, that He hath borne witness concerning His

Son. ¹⁰ He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made Him a liar, because he hath not believed on the witness which God hath borne concerning His Son. ¹¹ And this is the witness, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. ¹² He that hath the Son hath the life: he that hath not the Son of God hath not the life.

9. Εἰ τὴν μ. τ. ἀνθρ. λαμβ.] Si… accipimus V., If we receive… This is assumed as unquestioned: c. iii. 13. The threefold witness of which St John has spoken, simply as being threefold, satisfies the conditions of human testimony. Much more then, he argues, does a threefold divine witness meet all claims; and such a witness, it is implied, we have in the witness of the Spirit, the water and the blood. This witness therefore is ‘greater’ than the witness of men in regard to its authority: John v. 36. Comp. c. iii. 20; iv. 4.

For μαρτ. λαμβ. see John iii. 11, 32 f.; v. 34.

The form of the argument is irregular. Instead of completing the sentence on the same type as he began, ‘much more shall we receive the witness of God,’ St John states that which is the ground of this conclusion, ’the witness of God is greater.’ ὅτι αὕτη ἐ…ὅτι…] quoniam hoc est …quia… V., because this is…that… The words look backward and forward. This triple witness which has been described, and which is now defined further to be a witness of God concerning His Son: this is the final form of the witness of God.

The witness was open and visible

10 τὴν μαρτ. ΝΒ the syrr: +τοῦ θεοῦ Α vg me. αντω ΑΒ: ἑαυτῷ Ν. τῷ θεῷ ΝΒ me syrr: τῷ υἱῷ Α vg syrhlmg (others read τῷ υἱῷ τοῦ θεοῦ, τῷ υἱῷ αὐτοῦ, and Cod. Am. omits by the first hand).

to the world in the general effect of Christ’s death and the pouring out of the Spirit: so much was unquestionable.

The first conjunction (because) does not give the ground of the superior authority of the divine witness, that is taken for granted, but the ground for appealing to it. Such a witness has been given, and therefore we appeal to it.

The second ὅτι is ambiguous. It may be (1) parallel with the former one: ‘because this is the witness of God, because, I say, He hath borne witness…’; or, it may be (2) explanatory of the μαρτυρίαν: ‘because this is the witness of God, even that He hath borne witness…’; or again (3) the word may be the relative (ὅ τι): ‘because this is the witness of God, even that which He hath witnessed…’

No one of the explanations is without difficulty. Against (2) it may be urged that it is strange to insist on the idea that the witness of God lies in the fact that He hath witnessed concerning His Son.

The usage of St John and of the Apostolic writers generally is against (3); though perhaps reference may be made to iii. 20; John viii. 25. [In Matt. xviii. 28 εἴ τι.]

The usage of St John (c. i. 5; v. 11, 14) is equally against (1).

On the whole it is best to take the clause as explanatory of αὕτη: ‘because this is the witness of God, even the fact that He hath borne witness concerning His Son.’ God has spoken; and His message is the witness to the Incarnation. Comp. v. 11.

μεμαρτύρηκεν] testificatus est V., hath witnessed. The form is to be distinguished from ‘witnesseth’ and ‘witnessed.’ μεμαρτύρηκα John i. 34; iii. 26; v. 33, 37; xix. 35. (Hebr. xi. 5; 3 John 12.)

ἐμαρτύρησα John i. 32; iv. 44; xiii. 21; Acts xv. 8; 1 Cor. xv. 15; 1 Tim. vi. 13; 3 John 6; Apoc. i. 2; Hebr. xi. 2, 4, 39.

It may be added that vv. 6—9 contain a testimony to the Holy Trinity in the several works of the Divine Persons: Christ ‘comes,’ the Spirit ‘witnesses,’ God (the Father) ‘hath witnessed concerning His Son.’

1 John 5:10

10. The witness is not of external testimony only, but internal also. Absolute self-surrender to the Son of God brings to the believer a direct consciousness of His Divine Nature and work. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself. That which for others is external is for the believer experimental. The witness of Spirit and water and blood becomes an inner conviction of life and cleansing and redemption. The title of divine dignity (the Son o God) points to the assurance of this effect. Moreover it is to be noticed that here the condition laid down is belief in the Person of Christ (πιστ. εἰς), and not belief in a fact (πιστ. ὅτι c. 1).

ὁ μὴ πιστ. τῷ θ.] he that believeth not God. The direct antithesis to ‘believing on the Son’ is ’not believing God.’ This follows from the fact that ‘believing on the Son’ comes from ‘believing God,’ that is, welcoming His testimony.

For the phrase μὴ πιστεύειν τῷ θεῷ

V. II]

(as distinguished from μὴ π. εἰς τὸν θ.) see John v. 24; vi. 29 f.; viii. 30 f. Comp. c. iii. 23 n.

ψεύστην πεπ. αὐ.] mendacem facit V., hath made Him a liar, false in all His dealings with men. See i. 10 n. The word marks the general character and not only falsity in the particular case. Comp. John viii. 44; c. ii. 4, 22; iv. 20. The form of expression suggests the idea of an inward conflict. A voice has been heard and it has been deliberately rejected.

πεποίηκεν…πεπίστευκεν] These two perfects definitely connect the present position of the unbeliever with a past act. When the crisis of choice came he refused the message: he made God a liar: he did not believe on His testimony: and the result of that decision entered into him and clings to him. Compare, for a similar use of πεπίστευκα, John iii. 18; vi. 69 (c. iv. 16); xi. 27; xvi. 27; xx. 29; 2 Tim. i. 12; Tit. iii. 8.

ὅτι οὐ πεπίστ.] The negative expresses the direct fact. Contrast John iii. 18 ὅτι μὴ πεπίστ. which presents the conception. See John vi. 64.

οὐ πεπίστ. εἰς τὴν μαρτ.] non credidit in testimonium V., hath not believed on the witness, not simply ‘believed the witness.’ The phrase is unique. Belief in the truth of the witness (πιστ. τῇ μαρτυρίᾳ, compare John v. 47) is carried on to personal belief in the object of the witness, that is, the Incarnate Son Himself.

The phrase is illustrated by πιστεύειν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα (v. 13 n.), in which the ’name’ represents the Person under the particular aspect which it expresses. In one other case πιστεύ- ειν εἰς is used with an object not directly personal, John xii. 36 πιστεύειν εἰς τὸ φῶς, but here φῶς is used with immediate reference to John viii. 12; ix. 5.

So it stands out that the ultimate object of faith is not a fact or a dogma but a Person.

ἦν μεμαρτ…] It might have seemed simpler to say ’the witness of God’ (v. 9); but St John repeats at length what he has shewn that witness to be, a witness concerning His Son.

11, 12. The witness, which has been shewn to be divine and internal, points also to the presence of a divine life, which, given once for all, is enjoyed by fellowship with the Son.

1 John 5:11

11. καὶ αὕτη…] ‘The witness of God’ (v. 9) is in part unfolded: the witness that He hath given concerning His Son is this, that He gave us eternal life. The Mission of His Son, which He attested, was the gift of life (John x. 10, 28; xvii. 2), of life in His Son (John xx. 31, ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι).

ζ. αἱ. ἔδωκεν] gave eternal life, not hath given. Compare c. iii. 23 f. (ἔδωκεν) with c. iii. 1; iv. 13; v. 20 (δέδωκεν). The reference is to the historic facts by which this life was communicated to humanity. That which before Christ’s coming was a great hope, by His coming was realised and given. The gift, as far as St John here regards it, was made to Christians (ἡμῖν), who appropriate it.

ζωὴν αἰώνιον] vv. 13, 20; c. iii. 15. This form is to be distinguished from ἡ ζ. ἡ αἰών. (c. i. 2, note) and ἡ αἰώνιος ζ. which occurs only John xvii. 3. It simply defines the character of the life, and does not identify it with the only true life.

11 ὁ θ. ἡμ. B (the) syrhl: ἡμ. ὁ θ. NA vg me syrvg.

ἐν τῷ υἱῷ] The life is not separate from God but in God. Believers united with Christ are in Him united with God. Comp. Rom. vi. 23; 2 Tim. i. 1.

1 John 5:12

12. ὁ ἔχων…] The variations from exact parallelism in the two members of the verse are significant. In the second member τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ stands for τὸν υἱόν, and the position of τὴν ζωὴν is changed.

ὁ ἔχων τὸν υἱόν] He that hath the Son, in Whom the Father is known. Comp. c. ii. 23; 2 John 9; and for the use of ἔχειν, John iii. 29; iv. 17.

ἔχει τὴν ζ.] hath life, or rather the life which God has given. Contrast c. 13; iii. 15; John v. 26; x. 10; xx. 31. Comp. Col. iii. 4.

In the spirit of these words Ignatius speaks of Jesus Christ as τὸ ἀδιάκριτον ἡμῶν ζῆν ‘our inseparable life’ (Eph. 3); and τὸ ἀληθινὸν ἡμῶν ζῆν, ‘our true life’ (Smyrn. 4). Comp. Magn. 5; Trall. 9.

ὁ μὴ ἔχων τ. υἱ. τοῦ θ.] he that hath not the Son of God. The fuller title seems to mark emphatically the necessity of failure in such a case. God is the only source of life.

For the combination of the positive and negative see c. i. 5; ii. 4, 27; John i. 3; iii. 16.

III. THE ACTIVITY AND CONFIDENCE OF THE CHRISTIAN LIFE: EPILOGUE.

This last section of the Epistle is symmetrical in structure:

1. The aim re-stated (13). 2. The confidence of spiritual action (14-17). 3. The certainty of spiritual knowledge (18-20).

2. A final warning (21).

The progress of thought is clear. Having reached the close of his writing St John recalls the main purpose of writing it (i. 4), which he has fulfilled (c. 13); and then illustrates the confidence of the Christian life under two aspects (1) as it finds expression in spiritual action (14-17), and (2) as it is realised in inward conviction (18-20). He concludes by a warning against everything which usurps the place of God (21).

1. The aim of the Epistle restated (13).

¹³ These things have I written, that ye may know that ye have eternal life, to you who believe on the name of the Son of God.

1 John 5:13

13. Ταῦτα ἔγραψα] These things have I written (I wrote)… In reviewing his Epistle St John indicates the fulfilment of his purpose (i. 3, 4). The consciousness of eternal life brings divine fellowship and completed joy. Comp. John xx. 30 f.

For the use of ἔγραψα (contrast γέγραψα John xix. 22) see c. ii. 12 -14 note. The Apostle looks back upon his work, and records the aim which he set before himself.

ἵνα εἰδῆτε] ut sciatis V., that ye may know with a knowledge final and certain. Compare ii. 29 note; iii. 14 note. The eternal life may be present and yet not realised in its inherent power. The fruits may not be referred to their source; and again they may be delayed. But there is a knowledge of life which is independent of external signs; and this St John seeks to quicken.

The order ζωὴν ἔχ. αἰών. is not found

13 ὑμῖν ΝΑΒ vg me the syrr: +τοῖς πιστεύουσιν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ 5. ἔχ. αἰών. ΑΒ vg syrhl: αἰών. ἔχ. Ν. τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ΝΒ syrr: οἱ πιστεύ- οντες ΝΑ vg me the: καὶ ἵνα πιστεύητε 5. 14 ἔχομεν: ἔχωμεν Α. ὅτι ἐάν τι 5ΝΒ syrhl the: ὅτι ἂν Α: ὅτι ὁ ἐάν vg syrvg.

elsewhere: the epithet comes as an afterthought: ’that ye have life—yes, eternal life.’ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν] to you who believe. The dative, which is added as a kind of afterthought, defines the character of the persons who are addressed: ’to you, yes, to you who believe…’ Compare John i. 12; v. 16. The present activity of faith (πιστεύουσιν) is the sign of life (iii. 23 note).

τοῖς πιστ. εἰς τὸ ὄν…] qui creditis in nomine…V., who believe in the name of…, who believe in Him who is revealed to us under this title as being the Son of God. Contrast iii. 23 note (πιστ. τῷ ὄν.); and compare John i. 12 note; ii. 23 note; iii. 18. For similar uses of ὄνομα see c. ii. 12 (διὰ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ) note; 3 John 7 (τὸ ὄνομα) note.

τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ] the Son of God, vv. 5, 10, 12, 20; iii. 8 note; iv. 15. The title is the pledge of the certainty of the possession of life.

2. The confidence of spiritual action (14—17).

The consciousness of a divine life brings to the believer perfect boldness in prayer, that is, in converse with God (14, 15); and this boldness finds characteristic expression in intercession for the brethren (16, 17).

¹⁴ And this is the boldness which we have towards Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He heareth us. ¹⁵ And if we know that He heareth us whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions which we have asked from Him.

¹⁶ If any one see his brother sinning a sin not unto death, he shall ask, and He (he) will give him life, even to them that sin not unto death. There is sin unto death: I do not say that he should pray for that: ¹⁷ all unrightousness is sin, and there is sin not unto death.

1 John 5:14

14. καὶ αὕτη…] It is implied that the knowledge which the Christian can gain is not for mere passive possession, nor yet for himself alone. It finds scope in corresponding expression. The life is fruitful.

ἡ παρρησία ἦν ἔχομεν…] fiducia quam habemus… V., the boldness of speech, utterance, which we have as the consequence of our possession of life. See c. ii. 28 note. The gift of eternal life enables the believer to come directly before God (Hebr. iv. 16) and speak every thought without reserve. This he has strength to do in the present trials of life (c. iii. 21); and he looks forward to a like openness of trust ‘at the presence of Christ’ (ii. 28), and ‘in the day of judgment’ (iv. 17).

πρὸς αὐτόν] ad eum V., towards Him, that is, God, the main subject of the passage.

αὕτη… ὅτι… ἀκούει…] this… that …He heareth] The fact (that He heareth) and not the conviction of the fact (‘we know that He heareth’), is identified with the feeling. Our boldness is not simply a belief, but indeed a certainty, an experience.

ἐάν τι αἰτώμεθα] quodcunque petierimus V., if we ask anything. The distinction between the middle (ai-

τέισθαι) and the active (αἰτεῖν) is not sharply drawn; but generally the personal reference is suggested by the middle while the request is left wholly undefined as to its destination by the active. Compare John xvi. 24, 26; xiv. 13, 14; xv. 16 with xv. 7; James iv. 2, 3. For αἰτεῖσθαι see Matt. xxvii. 20 (and parallels), 58 (and parallels); Acts iii. 14.

κατὰ τὸ θέλημα αὐ.] according to His will. Comp. 1 Pet. iv. 19; Gal. i. 4; Eph. i. 5, 11. This will finds expression in the soul: John xv. 7; and is the continuous manifestation of the divine nature through Christ. Thus asking ‘according to the will of God’ is equivalent to asking ‘in Christ’s name’: John xiv. 13 note.

‘The will of God’ regards the spiritual consummation of man (c. ii. 17; Rom. ii. 18), and all external things only so far as they are contributory to this.

ἀκούει ἡμῶν] Compare John ix. 31; xi. 41 f. This sense of ‘hearing’ is peculiar to St John. The ‘hearing’ of God, like the ‘knowledge’ of God, carries with it every perfect consequence. For the thought see c. iii. 22.

1 John 5:15

15. καὶ ἐὰν οἴδαμεν…] Et scimus V., si scimus F., And if we know… The force of this unusual construction appears to be to throw the uncertainty upon the fact of the presence of the knowledge and not upon the knowledge itself. The sense required is not ‘and should we know,’ but ‘and should it be that we know.’ ὁ ἐὰν αἰτώμεθα] whatsoever we ask. This universal phrase can be substituted for the limited phrase which was used before (ἐὰν τι αἰτ. κ.τ. θ.). The believer would not make his own any prayer which is not according to God’s will. And since he has made God’s will his own will, he has all he truly seeks in immediate and present possession (Mark xi. 24) though the visible fulfilment may be delayed.

τὰ αἰτήματα] petitiones V., the petitions (Phil. iv. 6; Luke xxiii. 24): the substance of the requests, if not necessarily the actual things asked for (τὰ αἰτηθέντα).

ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ] from Him. These words go perhaps more naturally with ‘have’ (c. ii. 20) than with ‘asked.’ Yet see Matt. xx. 20 (ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ).

16, 17. That boldness of access to God, which finds expression in prayer, finds its most characteristic expression in intercessory prayer. Fellowship with God involves fellowship with man (i. 3). The energy of Christian life is from the first social. Hence St John passes naturally from the general thought of prayer to that of prayer for the brethren. And in doing this he fixes attention on the failures of Christians. These are the sorest trial of faith.

The prevailing power of intercession corresponds with the Christian revelation of the unity of the Body of Christ. When this power is exercised for others it is exercised in a true sense for ourselves, and not, arbitrarily as it were, for those apart from us. Apostolic teaching recognises a mysterious dependence of man upon man in the spiritual order like that which is now being shewn to exist in the physical order; and throughout the Epistle

16 αἰτήσει…δώσει: αἰτήσις (-ήσεις)…δώσεις N*. ἁμαρτάν. ἁμαρτίαν μὴ Α.

St John assumes the reality of this inner fellowship among those whom he addresses, and he bases his arguments upon it.

Compare 1 Pet. iv. 8 τὴν εἰς ἑαυτοὺς ἀγάπην; id. 10 εἰς ἑαυτοὺς αὐτὸ διακονοῦντες; Eph. iv. 32; Col. iii. 13 χαριζόμενοι ἑαυτοῖς; Col. iii. 16 νουθετοῦντες ἑαυτούς.

1 John 5:16

16. Ἐάν τις ἴδη…] If any one see … The duty, the instinct, is universal in the Christian Society. At the same time the character of the sin towards which the duty is exercised is clear even outwardly. It is not a matter simply of suspicion or doubt.

τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ] his brother. The end of prayer is the perfection of the whole Christian body. The Christian prays for himself only as a member in the society. The sight of sin in ‘a brother’—a fellow Christian (c. ii. 9 note)—and it is only with Christians that St John is dealing— necessarily stirs to intercession. Comp. Clem. ad Cor. i. 2 ἐπὶ τοῖς παραπτώμασι τῶν πλῆσιον ἐπενθεῖτε· τὰ ὑστερήματα αὐτῶν ἴδια ἐκρίνετε.

ἁμαρτ. ἁμαρτ.] peccare peccatum V., sinning a sin. The form of expression (ἁμαρτάνοντα, inadequately rendered in the Latin) emphasises the outward present character of the act. There is no exact parallel in N. T. to the phrase. Comp. c. ii. 25. Winer iii. § 32, 2.

μὴ πρὸς θάνατον] not unto death. Life is fellowship with Christ (v. 12). Death is separation from Him. All sin tends to make the fellowship less complete. Yet not all equally; nor all in a fixed and unalterable degree.

The thought is not of the definite external characteristics of particular acts, as having an absolute value, but of acts in relation to the man’s whole nature and life.

The clause ’not unto death’ goes both with the participle and with the noun, as is shewn separately afterwards.

For the conception of ‘death’ see c. iii. 14 (the only other place in the Epistles where the word occurs), John v. 24 (viii. 51 f.; vi. 50; xi. 26; viii. 24). The thought is evidently not of physical death as James v. 14 ff. Compare, in another connexion, John xi. 4 αὕτη ἡ ἀσθένεια οὐκ ἔστι πρὸς θάνατον. The subjective negative (μὴ πρὸς θ.) naturally follows from the supposition (ἐάν τις). It is otherwise in v. 17.

αἰτήσει] petit (-at) V., postulabit F., he shall ask. This will be his natural and spontaneous action. There is no need of a command.

καὶ δώσει] and he will give. The subject has been taken to be (1) the intercessor, or (2) God (dabit ei vitam Dominus Tert. de Pudic. 19; but dabitur ei, id. 2). In favour of the first view the continuity of the construction (αἰτήσει, δώσει) and the parallel James v. 20 have been urged.

The second view is that which is at first suggested by the language of Scripture generally. To ‘give life’ is elsewhere treated as a divine prerogative; John vi. 33; x. 28; xvii. 2; v. 11. But there is nothing unscriptural in the thought that the believer does that which God does through him; James v. 20. Still on the whole it seems more natural to see here a reference to the direct action of God.

If ‘God’ be the subject of ‘give’

then αὐτῷ may be the ’ethical’ dative, and τοῖς πιστ. the direct object of δώσει: ‘God shall give life to those that sin not unto death for him, in answer to his prayers.’ This however seems to be artificial. The αὐτῷ is most naturally the sinning brother in any case.

δ. ζωήν] give life. The sinner is not ‘dead,’ nor yet ‘sinning unto death,’ but his life is, as it were, suspended in part. Comp. John x. 10.

τοῖς ἁμαρτ.] even to them that… The single case (ἁμαρτάνοντα) is now generalised. Comp. v. 13.

The apposition of a personal plural to an abstract noun is not strictly parallel; 1 Cor. i. 2.

ἔστιν ἁμ. πρὸς θ.] Est peccatum ad mortem V., There is sin unto death. The translation ‘a sin’ (ἁμαρτία τις) is too definite. The thought is not of specific acts as such, but of acts which have a certain character: ‘There is that which must be described as sin unto death; there is that which wholly separates from Christ.’ The phrase, it must be remembered, comes in a passage which deals with the prayer of Christians for Christians and not for heathen. See Additional Note.

οὐ περὶ ἐκείνης λέγω ἵνα…] non pro illo dico ut roget quis V., not concerning that do I say that… The sin unto death is isolated and regarded in its terrible distinctness (ἐκείνη). The words περὶ ἐκείνης may be connected either with λέγω or with ἐρωτήσῃ. Perhaps it is best to connect them with ἐρωτήσῃ. Comp. John xvi. 26; xvii. 9, 20.

The construction λέγω ἵνα is not common: Acts xix. 4. Comp. εἰπεῖν ἵνα Matt. iv. 3, &c.; ἐρρήθη ἵνα Apoc. vi. 11, &c.

ἐρωτήσῃ] make request. The change of the verb from αἰτεῖν (V. peters), (αἰτεῖσθαι), to ἐρωτᾶν (V. rogare), cannot but be significant. Ἔρωτᾶν is the word which is used of Christ’s prayer to the Father (John xiv. 16; xvi. 26; xvii. 9, 15, 20; comp. 1 Thess. iv. 1; 2 John 5). It seems to mark the request which is based upon fellowship, upon a likeness of position. Here then it would naturally express the prayer of brother for brother as such, to the common Father. Such a prayer is not enjoined by the apostle. At the same time he does not forbid it. It does not lie within his scope¹.

Additional Note on v. 16. Sin unto death.

The phrase ‘sin unto death’ is introduced as one which was familiar to the readers of the Epistle and is evidently borrowed from current language. And so in fact the distinction of ‘sins unto death’ and ‘sins not unto death’ is common among Rabbinic writers (Schoettgen ad loc.) and represents, it cannot be doubted, an old traditional view.

The phrase ‘sin unto death’ in use among Jews.

1. In the first and simplest sense a ‘sin unto death’ would be a sin requiring the punishment of natural death: comp. Num. xviii. 22 ἀμαρτία θανατηφόρος¹. Death in such a case was final exclusion from the Divine Society.

A sin punishable by death.

2. It was a natural extension of this meaning when the phrase was used for an offence which was reckoned by moral judgment to belong to the same class. Words very closely resembling those of St John are used Test. xii. Patr. Issach. 7 οὐκ ἔγνων ἐν ἐμοὶ (al. ἐπ’ ἐμέ) ἀμαρτίαν εἰς (for πρὸς) θάνατον. Comp. 1 Cor. v. 11.

A sin of the same class.

3. If now the same line of thought is extended to the Christian Society, it will appear that a sin which in its very nature excludes from fellowship with Christians would be rightly spoken of as a ‘sin unto death.’ Such a sin may be seen in hatred of the brethren (c. iii. 15), or in the selfishness which excludes repentance, the condition of forgiveness (i. 7), or in the faithlessness which denies Christ, the One Advocate (v. 21; iv. 2). But in each case the character of the sin is determined by the effect which it has on the relation of the doer to God through Christ in the Divine Society. We are not to think of specific acts, defined absolutely, but of acts as the revelation of moral life.

A sin carrying exclusion from the Christian society if persisted in.

4. It must be noticed further that St John speaks of the sin as ’tending to death’ (πρὸς θάνατον) and not as necessarily involving death. Death is, so to speak, its natural consequence, if it continue, and not its inevitable

Death the tendency not the necessary issue.

¹ Origen identifies the two phrases: ἐπὶ ἀμαρτήμασι τοῖς μὴ πρὸς θάνατον ἢ ὡς ὠνόμασεν ἐν Ἀριθμοῖς ὁ νόμος τοῖς μὴ θανατηφόροις (in Matt. T. xiii. § 30). In another passage he treats the infliction of death as the complete expiation of the crime for which it is inflicted: Absolvitur peccatum per pœnam mortis, nec superest aliquid quod pro hoc crimine judicii dies et pœna æterni ignis inveniat (Hom. in Lev. xiv. § 4).

issue as a matter of fact. Its character is assumed to be unquestionable, and its presence open and notorious.

The mode of dealing with such a sin.

5. The question then could not but arise, How is such flagrant sin in a brother—a fellow Christian—to be dealt with? For it must be remembered that the words of the apostle are directed to those who are members of the Christian Church, sharing in the privileges of the common life. The answer follows naturally from a view of the normal efficacy of Christian intercession. The power of prayer avails for those who belong to the Body (comp. John xiii. 10). But for those who are separated from the Body for a time or not yet included in it the ordinary exercise of the energy of spiritual sympathy has, so far as we are taught directly, no promise of salutary influence. The use of common prayer in such cases is not enjoined; though it must be observed that it is not forbidden. St John does not command intercession when the sin is seen, recognised by the brother, in its fatal intensity; but on the other hand he does not expressly exclude it. Even if the tenour of his words may seem to dissuade such prayer, it is because the offender lies without the Christian Body, excluded from its life but yet not beyond the creative, vivifying power of God.

In some cases uttermost chastisement necessary.

6. We can understand in some degree how such sins, either in men or in nations, must be left to God. Chastisement and not forgiveness is the one way to restoration¹. The book of the prophet Jeremiah is a divine lesson of the necessity of purification through death for a faithless people. And the fortunes of Israel seem to illustrate the character of God’s dealings with men.

Patristic comments.

7. The patristic comments upon the passage offer an instructive subject for study.

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA.

CLEMENT of Alexandria in discussing the different kinds of voluntary and wrong action (Strom. ii. 15. § 66) refers to the language of St John as shewing that he recognised differences in sin (φανεται…τὰς διαφορεῖς τῶν ἀμαρτιῶν ἐκδιάσκων), and quotes as illustrating the kind of distinction to which he refers Ps. i. 1, but he gives no classification of specific offences.

TERTULLIAN.

TERTULLIAN naturally lays down a clear and definite interpretation: ‘Who, he asks, can escape from the sin of rash anger…of breaking engage-

¹ The truth finds a noble expression in Browning’s The Ring and the Book: The Pope, 2116 ff.

For the main criminal I see no hope Except in such a suddenness of fate. I stood at Naples once, a night so dark I could have scarce conjectured there was earth

Anywhere, sky or sea or world at all: But the night’s black was burst through by a blaze—

Thunder struck blow on blow, earth groaned and bore,

Through her whole length of mountains visible:

There lay the city thick and plain with spires,

And, like a ghost disshrouded, white the sea.

So may the truth be flashed out by one blow,

And Guido see, one instant, and be saved.

With this compare Guido’s last words, Abate—Cardinal—Christ—Maria—God—

Pompilia, will you let them murder me?

‘ments, of speaking falsely through shame or necessity…so that if there ‘were no pardon for such acts, no one could be saved. Of these then there ‘will be pardon through Christ, our Advocate with the Father. There are ‘however offences of a different character, heavier and deadly, such as admit ’no pardon, murder, idolatry, fraud, denial [of Christ], blasphemy, and ‘assuredly also adultery and fornication, and every other violation of the ’temple of God. For these Christ will no longer plead: these he who has ‘been born of God will absolutely not commit, as he will not be a son of ‘God, if he has committed them¹.’

ORIGEN speaks with wise reserve; after referring to 1 Cor. iii. 15, Matt. ORIGEN. xvi. 26, he continues, ‘There are some sins which are to loss (ad damnum)… ‘some to destruction (ad interitum)…What kind of sins however are sins ’to death, what not to death but to loss, cannot, I think, easily be deter- ‘mined by any man’ (Hom. in Ex. x. § 3²).

HILARY brings out an important aspect of the truth. ‘There is,’ he HILARY. says, ‘a limit to mercy (misericordia), and justice must be used in shewing ‘pity. We can feel sorrow for those whose crimes are great, but there is ’no room for mercy. For mercy turns to ask pardon of God for that which ‘is done; but to give pardon to wrong deeds is not to shew mercy but not ’to observe justice in mercy. This consideration the apostle John observed ‘most carefully saying: Si quis scit fratrem suum delinquere sed non ad ‘mortem, petat et dabit illi Deus etiam. Est enim peccatum ad mortem ‘sed non pro eo dico’ (in cxl. Psalm. § 8).

AMBROSE regards the direction of St John as applying to the general AMBROSE. action of the Church but not as excluding absolutely all intercession. ‘He ‘did not speak to a Moses (Ex. xxxii. 31 f.) or a Jeremiah (Jer. xiv. 11; vii. ‘16; Baruch iii. 1 f.; v. 1), but to the people, who required to employ ‘another to pray for their own sins; for whom it is enough if they pray

¹ De pudic. 19, Cui enim non accidit aut irasei inique et ultra solis occasum, aut et manum immittere, aut facile maledicere, aut temere jurare, aut fidem pacti destruere, aut verecundia aut necessitate mentiri; in negotiis, in officiis, in quæstu, in victu, in visu, in auditu, quanta tentamur; ut si nulla sit venia istorum nemini salus competeret. Horum ergo erit venia per exoratorem patris Christum. Sunt autem et contraria istis, ut graviora et exitiosa, quæ veniam non capiant, homicidium, idololatria, fraus, negatio, blasphemia, utique et mœchia et fornicatio…Horum ultra exorator non erit Christus. Hæc non admittet omnino qui natus ex Deo fuerit, non futurus Dei filius si admiserit. The classification is instructive. In an earlier chapter (c. 2) he divides sins into ‘remissible’ and ‘irremissible’: the former are fit subjects of intercession, the latter not, and he concludes: Secundum hanc differentiam delictorum pœnitentiæ quoque conditio discriminatur. Aliaerit quæ veniam consequi possit, in delicto scilicet remissibili; alia quæ consequi nullo modo possit, in delicto scilicet irremissibili.

² Comp. in Joh. Tom. II. (IV. p. 62 R.). In Hom. in Lev. IV. § 5 Origen compares with 1 John v. 16 the words in 1 Sam. ii. 25; and in the treatise On Prayer (§ 28) he follows out the comparison, implying that sins of idolatry, adultery and fornication are not to be remitted by the prayer and offerings of the Church.

‘God for lighter faults, and think that the pardon of graver must be re-‘served for the prayers of the just’ (de paenit. i. 10).

JEROME.

JEROME combines the language of 1 Sam. ii. 25 with that of St John, when he is insisting on the different degrees of the heinousness of sins. ‘Qui scit fratrem suum peccare peccatum non ad mortem, petat, et dabit ’ei vitam peccanti non ad mortem. Qui vero peccaverit ad mortem quis ‘orabit pro eo?’ ‘You see,’ he continues, ’that if we pray for smaller sins we ‘obtain pardon; if for greater, the obtaining pardon is difficult; and that ’there is a great interval between some sins and others’ (adv. Jocia. ii. § 30).

AUGUS-TINE.

The interpretation of AUGUSTINE is of great interest. His commentary on the verse of St John’s Epistle is not preserved, but in his treatise on the Sermon on the Mount (c. A. D. 393) he treats of the passage, and says: Aperte ostendit esse quosdam fratres pro quibus orare non nobis praecipitur, eum Dominus etiam pro peccatoribus nostris orare jubecat…Peccatum ergo fratris ad mortem puto esse cum post agnitionem Dei per gratiam Domini nostri Jesu Christi quisque oppugnat fraternitatem et adversus ipsam gratiam qua reconciliatus est Deo invidentiae facibus agitatur (de Serm. Dom. i. 22, 73). In reviewing this passage afterwards in his Retractions (c. A. D. 426-7) he writes: Quod quidem non confirmavi, quoniam hoc putare me dixi: sed tamen addendum fuit, si in hac tam seelerata mentis perversitate finierit hanc vitam; quoniam de quocunque pessimo in hac vita constituto non est utique desperandum, nec pro illo imprudenter oratur de quo non desperatur (Retract. i. 19, 7).

He develops this idea of deliberate persistence in evil in treating of the sin against the Holy Spirit:

Hoc [peccatum in Spiritum Sanctum] est duritia cordis usque ad finem huius vitae qua homo recusat in unitate corporis Christi, quod vivificat Spiritus Sanctus, remissionem accipere peccatorum…Hic ergo domo gratiae Dei quicunque restiterit et repugnaverit vel quoquo modo fuerit ab eo alienus usque in finem vitae non remittetur ei neque in hoc sacculo neque in futuro; hoc scilicet tam grande peccatum ut eo teneantur cuncta peccata quod non probatur ab aliquo esse commissum nisi cum de corpore exierit (Epist. clxxx. v (I), xi. § 49). No one can be pronounced guilty of it while life still continues: Hoc blasphemia Spiritus, cui nunquam est ulla remissio… non potest in quoquam, ut diximus, dum in hac adhuc vita est deprehendi (Serm. lxxi. 3. 21).

The fatal consequences of the sin are, he points out, involved in its essential character:

Ille peccat in Spiritum Sanctum qui, desperans vel irridens atque contemnens prædicationem gratiae per quam peccata diluuntur et pacis per quam reconciliamur Deo, detrectat agere penitentiam de peccatis suis et

¹ Bede silently quotes this interpretation in his Commentary; and afterwards a singular alternative: Potest etiam peccatum usque ad mortem accipi, pro quo rogare quemquam vetat, quia scilicet peccatum quod in hac vita non corrigitur ejus venia frustra post mortem postulatur. But he prefers Augustine’s view.

in eorum impia atque mortifera quadam suavitate perdurandum sibi esse decernit et in finem usque perdurat (in Ep. ad Rom. § 14; comp. § 22).

Quisquis igitur reus fuerit impenitentiae contra Spiritum in quo unitas et societas communionis congregatur Ecclesiae nunquam illi remittetur; quia hoc sibi clausit ubi remittitur…(Sermo lxxi. 21, 34).

For chastisement is the way to restoration: Plane si in tantas icris iniquitates ut repellas a te virgam verberantis, si repellas manum flagellantis et de disciplina Dei indigneris et fugias a Patre credente et nolis eum Patrem pati quia non parcit peccanti, tu te alienasti ab hereditate, ipse te non abject; nam si maneres flagellatus non remaneres exhereditatus (in Psalm. lxxxviii. Serm. ii. § 3).

CHRYSOSTOM, like several earlier writers, connects the passage in St John with the words of Eli (1 Sam. ii. 25), and finds the description of the sin in Ps. xlix. 18 ff. The fatal consequences which it brings are due to the accompanying wilful impenitence. ‘How,’ he adds, ‘can (God) forgive ‘one who does not allow that he has sinned, and does not repent! For ‘when we ask medicine from the physician we shew him the wound’ (in Ps. xlix. § 7).

In a letter attributed to GELASIUS the issue of the sin in death is made to lie wholly in impenitence. He has spoken of the sin of heretics against the Holy Spirit which was incapable of forgiveness as long as they persisted in it; and then he goes on: ‘As the passage of the apostle ‘John runs in like sense: Est peccatum ad mortem, non dico ut oretur ‘pro eo; et est peccatum non ad mortem, dico ut oretur pro eo. There is ‘a sin unto death when men abide in the same sin: there is a sin not ‘unto death when men abandon the same sin. There is no sin for the ‘remission of which the Church does not pray, or which it cannot absolve ‘when men cease from it in virtue of the power given to it from God’… (Cod. Can. Eccles. xlvii. § 5; Migne, Patrol. Lat. lvi. p. 622).

CECUMENIUS, in the same spirit, when commenting upon the passage sees the ground of the apostle’s instruction in the absence of all signs of repentance in him ‘who sins a sin unto death.’ The brother is not to pray for such an one, he says, ‘for he will not be heard, because he asks amiss, ‘speaking for one who shews no intention of return (περὶ τοῦ μηδεμίαν ‘ἐπιδεικνυμένου ἐπιστροφήν). For this sin is alone unto death that has no ‘regard to repentance (ἡ μὴ πρὸς μετάνοιαν ἀφορώσα), from which Judas ‘suffered and was brought under the eternal death’ (ad loc.)¹.

8. The language of St John gave occasion to the current distinction of sins as ‘mortal’ and ‘venial.’ In Augustine this distinction occurs frequently under the contrast of ‘crimina’ (in Joh. xli. 9 crimen est peccatum gravi accusatione et damnatione dignissimum) and ‘peccata’: c. duas Epp. Pel. i. § 28; in Ps. cxviii. 3, 2; de perfec. Just. Hom. ix. 20; Euchirid.

¹ In the Council of Troyes A.D. 879 it was forbidden to mention the names of those who had died under excommunication on the ground of this passage. Peccatum enim ad mortem, it is said, est perseverantia in peccato usque ad mortem (Conc. Tric. II. § 3). This widespread interpretation came from the ambiguity of the Latin preposition. See Bede above.

c. lxiv. So he writes: Non peccata sola sunt illa quae crimina nominantur, adulteria, fornicationes, sacrilegia, furta, rapine, falsa testimonia: non ipsa sola peccata sunt. Attendere aliquid quod non debebas peccatum est; audire aliquid libenter quod audiendum non fuit peccatum est; cogitare aliquid quod non fuit cogitandum peccatum est (Serm. celxxi. 9, 9).

The later technical distinction is well summed up by RICHARD of St Victor who discussed the difference in a brief tract: Mortale peccatum, quantum mihi videtur, triplici recte ratione distinguitur. Mortale est quod a quovis non potest committi sine grandi corruptione sui. Item mortale est quod non potest committi sine gravi laesione proximi. Mortale nihilominus quod non potest committi sine magno contemptu Dei. Cetera vero omnia videntur mihi venialia (Migne, Patrol. Lat. 196, p. 1193).

1 John 5:17

17. πᾶσα ἀδικία…] omnis iniquitas… V., all unrighteousness… The words are added to shew the wide scope which is given for the exercise of Christian sympathy and intercession. Apart from such sins as are open manifestations of a character alien from God, there are other sins which flow from human imperfection and infirmity, and in regard to these Christian intercession has its work. All unrighteousness (c. i. 9), all failure to fulfil our duty one to another, is sin; and in this ample field there is abundant opportunity for the exercise of prayer. There is a sin not unto death, of which the consequences may be removed by the brother’s petition.

The statement that ‘all unrighteousness is sin’ must be compared

¹ It is interesting to notice that ἐρωτᾶν is used in this sense of Christian prayer for Christians in a very early inscription in the Roman Catacombs: ΖΗΞΗΣ ΕΝ ΚΩ ΚΑΙ ΕΡΩΤΑ ΥΠΕΡ ΗΜΩΝ (Northcote and Brownlow, Roma Sotterranea, ii. 159).

17 οὐ πρὸς: οπ. οὐ γν syrhl the Tert.

with the comprehensive definition of sin in c. iii. 4 lawlessness is sin, and conversely sin is lawlessness. Sin is the most general term and is used in regard to the will of God for man. By whatever act, internal or external, man falls short of this will, as it is spiritually apprehended, he ‘sins.’ The will of God may be conceived of as embodied in ’law,’ in respect of the whole constitution of things, or in ‘right,’ in respect of the claims made by others. So it is that all violation of law and all violation of right is sin looked at in a special aspect. Unrighteousness is one manifestation of sin. Comp. Rom. vi. 13 ὅπλα ἀδικίας τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ.

3. The certainty of spiritual knowledge (18—20).

The thought of sin, of sin among the brethren, of sin unto death, forces the Apostle to recall once more the assurance of faith. In spite of the sad lessons of daily experience he reaffirms the truths which the Christian knows: the privileges of the divine birth (18); the fact of the divine kinsmanship (19); the advance in divine understanding issuing from divine fellowship (20).

The threefold repetition of οἶδαμεν, we know (18, 19, 20), gives a rhythmic form to the paragraph.

18 We know that everyone who is begotten of God sinneth not, but He that was begotten of God keepeth him and the evil one toucheth him not.

19 We know that we are in God and the whole world lieth in the evil one.

20 We know that the Son of God hath come and hath given to us understanding that we may know Him that is true; and we are in Him that is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ.

This is the true God and life eternal.

1 John 5:18

18. The power of intercession to overcome the consequences of sin might seem to encourage a certain indifference to sin. Therefore St John re-affirms the elements of Christian knowledge. From this point of sight the first truth of which the Christian is assured is that, in spite of the abnormal presence of sin even among the brethren, the child of God ‘sinneth not.’ He has a watchful Protector stronger than his adversary.

Οἶδαμεν] Scimus V., We know. St John uses this appeal to absolute knowledge in two forms: ‘we know,’ and ‘ye know.’ The former occurs:

In contrast with these appeals to fundamental knowledge, St John elsewhere appeals to the knowledge brought by actual experience (γινώ- σκομεν): v. 2 note.

St Paul uses the same form (οἶδαμεν) not unfrequently: 1 Cor. viii. 1, 4; 2 Cor. v. 1; Rom. ii. 2; iii. 19; vii. 14; viii. 22, 28; 1 Tim. i. 8.

Οἴδατε is found:

18 ὁ γεννηθεὶς: generatio vg.

iii. 15 οἴδατε ὅτι πᾶς ἀνθρωποκτόνος οὐκ ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον ἐν αὐτῷ μένουσαν. πᾶς ὁ γεγενν. ἐκ τοῦ θ.] omnis qui natus est ex Deo V. Comp. c. iii. 9 note.

οὐχ ἁμαρτάνει] Comp. iii. 9 note (ἁμαρτίαν οὐ ποιεῖ). While St John states this without reserve he yet recognises ’the brother’—brother as son of the one Father—‘sinning a sin not unto death’ (c. 16). The paradox remains unsolved.

ἀλλ’ ὁ γεννηθεὶς…τ. αὐ.] sed generatio (naticitas F.) Dei conservat cum V., but He that was Begotten of God keepeth him. He does not depend on his own strength or vigilance. He has an active Enemy (ὁ πονηρός), but he has also a watchful Guardian.

The phrase ὁ γεννηθεὶς ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ is unique. Standing as it does in close juxtaposition with ὁ γεγεννημένος ἐκ toῦ θεοῦ it is impossible to regard it as identical in reference, and the mention of the great adversary naturally suggests the thought of the Son of God. The peculiar expression is probably used to emphasise the connexion of the Son with those whom He ‘is not ashamed to call brethren’ (Hebr. ii. 11 ἐξ ἑνὸς πάντες); while the difference of γεννηθεὶς from γεγεννημένος suggests that difference in the sonship of the Son from the sonship of men which is marked in John v. 26 τῷ υἱῷ ἔδωκεν ζωὴν ἔχειν ἐν ἑαυτῷ.

The remarkable Latin reading appears to represent the Greek ἡ γέννησις τοῦ θεοῦ (Matt. i. 18).

τηρεῖ] The verb is used of persons Matt. xxvii. 36, 54; (xxviii. 4); John xvii. 11, 15 (note); Apoc. iii. 10; Jude 21 (ἑαυτοὺς τηρήσατε). It expresses a watchful regard from without rather than safe custody.

αὐτόν AB vg: ἑαυτόν SA**.

ὁ πονηρός] malignus V. See c. ii. 13 note.

ἅπτεται] tangit V. The verb occurs elsewhere in St John only in John xx. 17. It describes ‘a laying hold on,’ more than a mere superficial touch (θεγγάνειν). Even when it is used of simple physical contact, a deeper connexion is indicated, as when the Lord ’touched’ the sick. See Col. ii. 21 μὴ ἅψῃ μηδὲ γεύσῃ μηδὲ θίγῃς. Compare Ps. cv. 15 μὴ ἅψῃσθε tῶν χριστῶν μου. The ground of safety is revealed in John xiv. 30 ἐν ἐμοὶ οὐκ ἔχει οὐδέν. As yet the principle of evil is without.

1 John 5:19

19. From the general statement of the privilege of Sons of God St John goes on to the affirmation of the personal relation in which he and those whom he addresses stand to Him (ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐσμέν).

The structure of the verse is expressive. The absence of the personal pronoun (contrast iv. 6) in the first clause throws all the emphasis upon the divine source of life: ‘We know that it is from God we draw our being.’ In the second clause the emphasis is changed. Over against the Christian Society, only faintly indicated in the preceding words, stands ’the whole world,’ and on this attention is fixed. The relation of the Church to God is widely different from that of the world to the Evil One.

This difference is brought out in the two corresponding phrases ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ εἶναι and ἐν τῷ πονηρῷ κεῖσθαι. The first describes the absolute source of being: the second the actual (but not essential) position.

ἐκ τοῦ θ. ἐ.] See Additional Note on iii. 1.

καὶ ὁ κ. ὃ.] This clause like the

²⁰ οἴδαμεν δὲ ὅτι ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ἦκει, καὶ δέδωκεν ἡμῖν διάνοιαν ἵνα γινώσκομεν τὸν ἀληθινόν· καὶ ἐσμεν ἐν τῷ

20 οἴδαμεν δὲ ΝΒ me: καὶ οἴδαμεν A vg syrr the. ἦκει: +et carnem induit nostri causa et passus est et resurrexit a mortuis; adsumpsit nos et dedit…(Latt.). δέδωκεν: ἔδωκεν A. γινώσκομεν ΝΑΒ*: γινώσκωμεν S. τὸν ἀλ.: τὸ ἀλ. Ν* the: +θεόν A vg me (Latt.). ἐσμέν: simus vg. ἐν τῷ ἀλ.: om. me: in vita the.

corresponding clauses in vv. 18 (ἀλλὰ ὁ γενν.), 20 (καὶ ἐσμεν), is an independent statement and not dependent on ὅτι. The Christian is able to look upon the saddest facts of life without being overwhelmed by them.

The order ὁ κόσμος ὅλος suggests a slightly different conception from ὅλος ὁ κόσμος (c. ii. 2): ’the world, the organization of society as alien from and opposed to God, is wholly, in all its parts and elements, placed in the domain of…’ The two thoughts of the world, and of the entirety of it, are given separately. The same form occurs Matt. xvi. 26 and parallels; and the same order in Matt. xxvi. 59; Lc. xi. 36; John iv. 53; Acts xxi. 30; 1 Cor. xiv. 23; Apoc. iii. 10; vi. 12; xii. 9; xvi. 14. There is a similar difference of colour given by the corresponding position of πᾶς: John v. 22; xvi. 13; Matt. x. 30; xiii. 56; xxvi. 56; Acts xvi. 33; Rom. xii. 4; xvi. 16; 1 Cor. vii. 17; x. 1; xv. 7; xvi. 20, &c.

ἐν τῷ πον. κ.] in maligno positus est V., lieth in the evil one, is placed in the sphere of his influence. There is no question here of the Evil One ’laying hold on’ (ἄπτεσθαι) the world, as from without (v. 8): it has been placed ‘in him.’ The phrase answers to the εἶναι ἐν τῷ ἀληθινῷ which follows, and to the characteristic Pauline ἐν χριστῷ. Comp. c. iii. 24, iv. 15 note. The connexion shews beyond question that τῷ πονηρῷ is masculine, and the converse of κεῖσθαι ἐν τ. π. is given in John xvii. 15 ἵνα τηρήσης ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ.

A close parallel to the expression is found in Soph. Œd. Col. 247 ἐν ὑμῖν ὡς θεῷ κείμεθα τλάμονες. Comp. Œd. R. 314; Alc. 279.

1 John 5:20

20. The third affirmation of knowledge is introduced by the adversative particle (οἶδ. δέ). There is, this seems to be the line of thought, a startling antithesis in life of good and evil. We have been made to feel it in all its intensity. But at the same time we can face it in faith. That which is as yet dark will be made light. There is given to us the power of ever-advancing knowledge and of present divine fellowship. We can wait even as God waits. The particle δέ is comparatively unfrequent in St John’s writings: c. i. 7; ii. 2, 5, 11, 17; iii. 12, 17; iv. 18; 3 John 14.

ἦκει, καὶ δέδωκεν] hath come and hath given. Faith rests on the permanence of the fact and not upon the historic fact only. Comp. John viii. 42 note.

δέδωκεν] c. iii. 1, iv. 13. Contrast iii. 23, 24; v. 11 (ἔδωκεν) note.

διάνοιαν] sensum V., understanding. This is the only place in which the term occurs in St John’s writings; and generally nouns which express intellectual powers are rare in them. Thus St John never uses γνῶσις, nor is νοῦς found in his Gospel or Epistles. Διάνοια, as compared with νοῦς, represents the process of rational thought. Comp. Eph. iv. 18 ἐν ματαιότητι τοῦ νοῦς αὐτῶν, ἐσκοτωμένοι τῇ διανοίᾳ ὄντες (the first principles of the Gentiles were unsubstantial, and they had lost the power of right reasoning). Exclusive of quotations from the LXX, διάνοια is found: 1 Pet. i. 13 ἀναζωσάμενοι τὰς ὀσφύας τῆς διανοίας; 2 Pet. iii. 1 διεγείρω τὴν εἰλικρινῆ διάνοιαν;

I. X.: om. A vg.

and, in a more concrete sense, Lc. i. 51 διανοία καρδίας; Col. i. 21 ἐχθροὺς τῇ διανοίᾳ; Eph. ii. 3 τὰ θελήματα τῆς σαρκὸς καὶ τῶν διανοιῶν.

That with which ’the Son of God’ Incarnate has endowed believers is a power of understanding, of interpreting, of following out to their right issues, the complex facts of life; and the end of the gift is that they may know, not by one decisive act (ἵνα γνῶσιν) but by a continuous and progressive apprehension (ἵνα γινώσκωσι), ‘Him that is true.’ Thus the object of knowledge is not abstract but personal: not the Truth, but Him of Whom all that is true is a partial revelation.

It is evident that the fact of the Incarnation (υἱὸς τοῦ θ. ἦκει) vitally welcomed carries with it the power of believing in and seeing little by little the divine purpose of life under the perplexing riddles of phenomena.

The language in which Ignatius describes this gift is remarkable: διὰ τί οὐ πάντες φρόνιμοι γινόμεθα λαβόντες θεοῦ γνῶσιν, ὃ ἐστιν Ἰησοῦς Χριστός; τί μωρῶς ἀπολλύμεθα ἀγνοοῦντες τὸ χάρισμα ὃ πέπομφεν ἀληθῶς ὁ Κύριος; (ad Eph. xvii.).

[ἵνα γινώσκομεν] This clause finds a remarkable commentary in John xvii. 3. Eternal life is the never-ending effort after this knowledge of God. Compare John x. 38, ἵνα γνῶτε καὶ γινώσκητε ὅτι ἐν ἐμοὶ ὁ πατὴρ κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ.

It seems likely that γινώσκομεν is to be regarded as a corrupt pronunciation of γινώσκωμεν. It is remarkable that in John xvii. 3 many authorities read γινώσκουσιν for -ωσιν. Comp. Winer, iii. § 41. 1.

τὸν ἀληθινόν] cerum Deum V., quod est cerum F. (i.e. τὸ ἄλ.), Him that is true, Who in contrast with all imaginary and imperfect objects of worship completely satisfies the idea of Godhead in the mind of man, even the Father revealed in and by the Son (John i. 18, xiv. 9). Christ is also called ὁ ἀληθινός, Apoc. iii. 7; compare also Apoc. iii. 14 (vi. 10). For ἀληθινός see John i. 9, iv. 23, xv. 1 notes. Comp. 1 Thess. i. 9 θεὸς ζῶν καὶ ἀληθινός.

καὶ ἐσμεν…I. Χρ.] et simus (as depending on at) in vero filio eius V. St John adds a comment on what he has just said. Christians are not only enabled to gain a knowledge of God: they are already in fellowship with Him, ‘in Him.’ We are in Him that is true, even in His Son, Jesus Christ. The latter clause defines and confirms the reality of the divine fellowship. So far as Christians are united with Christ, they are united with God. His assumption of humanity (Jesus Christ) explains how the union is possible.

οὗτός ἐστιν…] As far as the grammatical construction of the sentence is concerned the pronoun (οὗτος) may refer either to ‘Him that is true’ or to ‘Jesus Christ.’ The most natural reference however is to the subject not locally nearest but dominant in the mind of the apostle (comp. c. ii. 22; 2 John 7; Acts iv. 11; vii. 19). This is obviously ‘He that is true’ further described by the addition of ‘His Son.’ Thus the pronoun gathers up the revelation indicated in the words which precede (comp. John i. 2 note): This Being this One who is true, who is revealed through and in His Son, with whom we are united by His Son—is the true God and life eternal. In other words the revelation of God as Father in Christ (comp. ii. 22 f.) satisfies, and can alone satisfy, the need of man. To know

θεός: om. (Latt.). ζωὴ αἱ. ΝΑΒ: ἡ ξ. αἱ. 5: ἡ ξ. ἡ αἱ. αἱ. αἱ.: + et resurrectio nostra (Latt.). 21 ἑαυτὰ Ν°Β: ἑαυτοὺς Ν°Α. εἰδώλων: + ἀμὴν 5.

God as Father is eternal life (John xvii. 3); and so Christ has revealed Him (c. i. 2).

ὁ ἀληθ. θ.] Comp. Is. lxv. 16 (LXX). Compare the famous words of Ignatius: εἰς θεὸς ἐστι ὁ φανερώσας ἑαυτὸν διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, ὃς ἐστιν αὐτοῦ λόγος αἰδίος, ἀπὸ σιγῆς προελθών, ὃς κατὰ πάντα εὐηρέστησεν τῷ πέμψαντι αὐτόν (ad Magn. viii.).

οὗτος…ζωὴ αἰών.] The phrase is not exactly parallel with those which describe (as far as we can apprehend it) the essential nature of God (John iv. 24, c. i. 5, iv. 8). See Additional Note on iv. 8. It expresses His relation to men, and so far is parallel with Hebr. xii. 29 (Deut. iv. 24).

On ‘Eternal life’ see Additional Note.

Additional Note (1) on v. 20. The idea of Life.

The idea of ‘Life’ in St John has been already touched upon in the note on i. 1; but it requires to be discussed somewhat more in detail. For the characteristic message which St John gives is of a life through which fellowship with man and God—the end of human existence—is perfectly realised.

i. The Source of Life.

The Father the source of life.

Of the Father alone it is said that He ‘hath life in Himself’ as the absolute final source of all life. This is the last limit of thought: John v. 26 ὁ πατὴρ ἔχει ζωὴν ἐν ἑαυτῷ, the Father hath life in Himself (comp. 1 Tim. vi. 16).

At the same time it is made known that the Father communicated to the Son the absolute possession of life: in this is expressed the idea of Sonship. The Son ‘hath life in Himself,’ but not as the final source of life. John v. 26 ὥσπερ ὁ πατὴρ ἔχει ζωὴν ἐν ἑαυτῷ, οὕτως καὶ τῷ υἱῷ ἔδωκεν ζωὴν ἔχειν ἐν ἑαυτῷ, as the Father hath life in Himself, even so gave He to the Son also to have life in Himself. Compare John vi. 57 ζῶ διὰ τὸν πατέρα, and Apoc. i. 17. But men have not ’life in themselves,’ either originally or by divine gift. Their life is a life of necessary, continuous, essential dependence (ἐν Χριστῷ ‘in Christ,’ according to St Paul’s phrase). This must remain so to the end. Even when they participate in the virtue of Christ’s humanity, they have life through Him and not in themselves: John vi. 57 (ὁ τρώγων), xiv. 19.

ii. The Nature of Life.

Terms for ’life’ and ’living’ in St John.

Three terms are used by St John to describe ’life’ under different aspects:

(1) ἡ ζωή (the life), ’life which is truly life’: c. iii. 14 note. (2) ζωὴ αἰώνιος, ’eternal life’ (not in Apoc.): c. i. 2 note.

For the shade of difference between ζωή and ζωὴ αἰώνιος see John iii. 36 (1 John iii. 14 f.; John v. 24).

(3) ἡ αἰώνιος ζωή (John xvi. 3; comp. Acts xiii. 46; 1 Tim. vi. 12); ἡ ζωὴ ἡ αἰώνιος (1 John i. 2, ii. 25), ’the eternal life’: c. i. 2 note.

In connexion with those terms the following verbal phrases must also be noticed:

(1) ζην to live: John v. 25, vi. 57, xi. 25, xiv. 19; 1 John iv. 9 (Apoc. xx. 5). Comp. 1 Pet. iv. 6; 1 Thess. v. 10; 2 Cor. xiii. 4; Rom. viii. 13; Hebr. xii. 9. (2) ζην εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, ’to live for ever’: John vi. 51, 58. Comp. Apoc. iv. 9, 10, xv. 7 ὁ ζῶν εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων (peculiar to St John in N. T.). (3) ἔχειν ζωήν, ’to have life’: John x. 10, xx. 31; 1 John v. 12 (τὴν ζ.) (peculiar to St John in N. T.). (4) ἔχειν ζωὴν αἰώνιον, ’to have eternal life’: John iii. 15 f., 36, v. 24, vi. 40, 47, 54; 1 John v. 13 (iii. 15). Comp. Matt. xix. 16.

In considering these phrases it is necessary to premise that in spiritual things we must guard against all conclusions which rest upon the notions of succession and duration. ‘Eternal life’ is that which St Paul speaks of as ἡ ὄντως ζωή, ’the life which is life indeed’ (1 Tim. vi. 19), and ἡ ζωὴ τοῦ θεοῦ, ’the life of God’ (Eph. iv. 18). It is not an endless duration of being in time, but being of which time is not a measure. We have indeed no powers to grasp the idea except through forms and images of sense. These must be used; but we must not transfer them as realities to another order.

Life for a finite creature is union with God (comp. Col. i. 16, 17 ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα…τὰ πάντα ἐν αὐτῷ συνέστηκεν; Acts xvii. 28 ἐν αὐτῷ ζῶμεν). Such union is for a rational being involved in a real and progressive knowledge of God in Christ. For spiritual knowledge is not external but sympathetic; and necessarily carries with it growing conformity to God. Hence ’the eternal life,’ which Christ is and gave, is described as lying in the continuous effort to gain a fuller knowledge of God and Christ (John xvii. 3 ἵνα γινώσκωσιν); or, as the apostle writes out the Lord’s words more fully: ’the Son of God hath come and hath given us understanding that we may ‘know (ἵνα γινώσκωμεν) Him that is true; and we are in Him that is true, ‘in His Son Jesus Christ’ (1 John v. 20). So it is that Christ’s words are ‘words of life’ (John vi. 68; comp. vi. 63; viii. 51; xii. 50; James i. 18; Acts v. 20 is different). Real knowledge rests on fellowship and issues in fellowship.

Under this aspect all being is a revelation of life to man (John i. 4), which may become intelligible to him. The thought is one which is especially needed in an age of scientific analysis. We are tempted on all sides to substitute the mechanism, or the part, for the whole: the physical conditions or accompaniments for the vital force. The life is not in us only but in the world.

Under another aspect it can be said that the Gospel is ’the revelation of life,’ and that in the Incarnation ’the life was made manifest.’ By the personal coming of the Word in flesh the worth of individual life is shewn. He who ’lives’ is conscious of power and office, and so far as he lives uses his power and fulfils his office.

This view of life corresponds with and completes the former. All power is finally the gift of God: all office is for the accomplishment of His will. Life therefore is the use of the gifts of God according to the will of God.

Or, to combine both notions, we are brought back to the original idea: life is fellowship with God, which includes fellowship with man, and this fellowship is realised in Christ.

iii. Christ the Life.

Christ is the Life in Creation and in the New Creation.

Christ is ’the life’ and that both in regard to the individual (John xi. 25 ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ἀνάστασις καὶ ἡ ζωή I am the Resurrection and the Life) and in regard to the whole sum of being (John xiv. 6 ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ὁδὸς καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια καὶ ἡ ζωή, I am the Way and the Truth and the Life). Even before His Coming in flesh, the Creation which He sustained by His presence was a divine revelation (John i. 4); and by His Coming ’the life was manifested’ and men recognised it (1 John i. 2).

He came that men may have life and the fulness of all that life needs (John x. 10 ζωὴν πέρισσον ἔχειν). The life which He gives is not and cannot be separated from Himself. Therefore, as things are, His Coming was crowned by His Passion and Exaltation (John iii. 15), whereby His Life was made available for others through Death (John xii. 32 24).

His offer of Life is universal (John vi. 31 ὁ ἄρτος ἐν ἐγώ Ἰωάτω ἡ σάρξ μου ἐστὶν ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου ζωῆς, the bread which I will give is my flesh for the life of the world). And the offer is made of the pure love of God (John iii. 16; 1 John iv. 10). The new creation is a work of spontaneous divine love even as the first creation, while it answered, necessarily answered, to the fulfilment of the divine idea (John i. 17 ἐγένετο).

In one sense the gift of life is made and complete (1 John v. 11 ζ. αἱ ἔδωκεν ἡμῖν); but under another aspect it is still offered, promised, given (John x. 28 δίδωμι αὐτοῖς ζ. αἱ.; xvii. 2 ἵνα…δώσει ζ. αἱ.; 1 John ii. 25 ἐπαγγελία). The spiritually sick, if living in one sense, require ’life’ (1 John v. 16 δώσει αὐτῷ ζωήν, τοῖς ἁμαρτάνουσιν μὴ πρὸς θάνατον: comp. John iv. 50). Comp. § v.

iv. The Life of the Believer.

The life of the believer is the possession of the Living Son.

The universal gift of life offered by Christ has to be personally appropriated (John vi. 35, 50 f., 58). In this process it comes through Christ, as the agent (1 John iv. 9 ἵνα ζήσωμεν δι’ αὐτοῦ, V. per eum: comp. John v. 40); and it comes for the sake of Christ, as the ground of quickening (John vi. 57 ζήσει δι’ ἐμέ, V. propter me), because He is what He is (1 John ii. 12). In other words the life of the believer follows from the life of Christ (John xiv. 19 ὅτι ἐγώ ζῶ καὶ ὑμεῖς ζήσεσθε, where the future is used in regard to the completer fulness of Christ’s working; comp. 2 Cor. iv. 10 f.; Col. iii. 4; Eph. ii. 5), and is realised in (that is, by union with) Him (John iii. 15; 1 John v. 11: comp. Rom. vi. 23; 2 Tim. i. 1), as He has been made known (John xx. 31 ζ. ἐχ. ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ). For the life is in the Living Son (1 John v. 11) and not in the letter of the Law (John v. 39); so that the possession of the Son is the possession of life (1 John v. 12, comp. Rom. v. 10 κατηλλάγημεν…διὰ τοῦ θανάτου…σωθησόμεθα ἐν τῇ ζωῇ αὐτοῦ). And he who is one with Christ is one with God (John xvii. 21 ἵνα ἐν ἡμῖν ὦσιν: comp. 1 John ii. 24 f.; John vi. 56 f.).

For the believer the transition from death to life has been made (John v. 24; 1 John iii. 14 μεταβεβήκαμεν ἐκ τοῦ θανάτου εἰς τὴν ζωήν:

comp. 1 John v. 12). But the consequences of the transition are realised, of life as the transition itself is conditioned, by the activity of faith (John iii. 16, 36, man vi. 47, xx. 31; 1 John v. 13 [ὁ πιστεύων, οἱ πιστεύοντες]; John vi. 40 ὁ θωρῶν καὶ πιστεύων). So man in a true sense works with God; and in by faith. John i. 12 the human and divine elements in the beginning, the growth and the issue of life are set side by side in a striking parallelism (ἐγεννήθησαν, ἐξουσίαν, τέκνα—ἔλαβον, πιστεύουσιν, γενέσθαι). By this energy of faith the believer finds union with Christ's humanity (John vi. 51, 54, 58: comp. vi. 35, 56, 58, x. 10).

v. Life present and future.

The life which lies in fellowship with God in Christ is, as has been seen already, spoken of as ’eternal’ life in order to distinguish it from the life of sense and time under which true human existence is veiled at present. Such a life of phenomena may be ‘death’ (1 John iii. 14: comp. v. 16). But ’eternal life’ is beyond the limitations of time: it belongs to the being of God (1 John i. 2 ἦν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα), and finds its consummation in the transforming vision of the Son seen as He is (1 John iii. 2; John xiv. 23, 2 f.). For us now therefore it is spoken of as both present and future.

1. The ’life eternal’ is essentially present, so far as it is the potential fulfilment of the idea of humanity (John iii. 36, v. 24, vi. 47, 54, xx. 31; 1 John v. 12); and the possession of life may become a matter of actual knowledge (1 John v. 13: comp. 1 John iii. 15).

This thought of the present reality of ’eternal life’ is characteristic of St John, and in its full development is peculiar to him (but comp. Gal. ii. 20).

2. At the same time the life is regarded as future in its complete future. realisation, so far as it is the fulfilment of Messianic promises (John iv. 14, 36, vi. 27, xii. 25, v. 25, vi. 57, xi. 25, xiv. 19, vi. 54: compare 1 John ii. 25, iii. 2; and also Mark x. 30; Gal. vi. 8).

Hence it is intelligible how ’eternal life’ is spoken of as ’the commandment’ of the Father (John xii. 50); and again as the progressive knowledge of the Father in the Son (1 John v. 20). For the commandment of God is represented to us in the work of Christ; and to embrace this in faithful obedience is to ‘have life in His name’ (John xx. 31), on which we believe (1 John v. 13) with growing intelligence.

If now we endeavour to bring together the different traits of ’the eternal life’ we see that it is a life which with all its fulness and all its potencies is now: a life which extends beyond the limits of the individual, and preserves, completes, crowns individuality by placing the part in connexion with the whole: a life which satisfies while it quickens aspiration: a life which is seen, as we regard it patiently, to be capable of conquering, reconciling, uniting the rebellious, discordant, broken elements of being on

1 In all these places the force of the present participle is conspicuous. St John uses the aor. partic. once only: John xx. 29. The force of the present can be seen by contrast with the aorist: [Mark] xvi. 16 f.; Luke i. 45, viii. 12;

Acts iv. 32, xi. 21, xix. 2; 2 Thess. i. 10, ii. 12; Eph. i. 13; Hebr. iv. 3; Jude 5; and again with the perfect: Acts xv. 5, xvi. 34; [xviii. 27, xix. 18;] xxi. 20, 25; Tit. iii. 8.

which we look and which we bear about with us: a life which gives unity to the constituent parts and to the complex whole, which brings together heaven and earth, which offers the sum of existence in one thought. As we reach forth to grasp it, the revelation of God is seen to have been unfolded in its parts in Creation; and the parts are seen to have been brought together again by the Incarnation.

Additional Note (2) on v. 20. ‘The true God.’

‘The true God’ answers to the words ‘God is love.’

‘Personality’ as applied to God.

Love involves a ’tri-personality.’

This fact indicated in the opening words of the Gospel, and of the Epistle.

When St John speaks of God as ‘He that is true’ (ὁ ἀληθινός), He who alone (John xvii. 3 ὁ μόνος ἀληθινὸς θεός) and absolutely fulfils the idea of God which man is constituted to form, and then in significant and mysterious words identifies union with ‘Him that is true,’ with union ‘with His Son Jesus Christ,’ he explains in the terms of historical revelation that which is involved in the statement ‘God is love.’ He indicates in what way the ‘personality’ of God is to be held and guarded from false conclusions. St John, as all the biblical writers, everywhere uses language of God which assigns to Him ‘action’ and ‘will.’ But, as far as our human observation reaches, ‘will’ implies resistance, and ‘action’ implies succession. Such limitations can find no place in the idea of God. The conception of ‘personality’ which we can form therefore expresses only a fragment of the truth, that side of it which assures us of the possibility of approach to God on our part as to One Who loves and may be loved.

But we cannot rest here. When we endeavour to think of God Himself we are necessarily led to inquire whether Scripture does not help us to rise to a thought in which we can see represented from the divine side that which is in the Divine Being the analogue of sole-personality in a finite being. This thought we find in the words ‘God is love.’ The phrase, as we have seen, describes the essence and not an attribute of God. It presents to us, as far as we can apprehend the truth, something of God in Himself. It must hold good of God in His innermost Being, if we may so speak, apart from creation. Now love involves a subject and an object, and that which unites both. We are taught then to conceive of God as having in Himself the perfect object of love and the perfect response of love, completely self-sufficing and self-complete. We thus gain, however imperfect language may be, the idea of a tri-personality in an Infinite Being as correlative to a sole-personality in a finite being. In the Unity of Him Who is One we acknowledge the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, in the interaction of Whom we can see love fulfilled.

The language in John i. 1, where we have opened a unique view of the Divine Being without any regard to a revelation to man, indicates the same thought. The relation of ’the Word’ to ‘God’ is described as a relation of active love: ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, the personal energy of the Word was directed towards, and (so to speak) regulated by ‘God,’ while the Word Himself ‘was God.’ In the Epistle the thought is presented differently. There it is ’the Life’ and not ’the Word’ which is spoken of. The conception of ’the Life’ is wider in its range than that of ’the Word,’ though it is through ’the Word’ that ’the Life’ is revealed. This life is ’the life eternal.’ It is not of this temporal order though it is made known in it, under its limitations. It is a life which essentially finds its original in the Godhead: ἦν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα, it was realised in the intercommunion of the Divine Persons, when time was not. Thus we have in this twofold revelation of an activity of ’the Word’ towards ‘God,’ of a fulfilment of ‘Life’ towards ’the Father,’ beyond time, such a vision as we can look upon of the fulness of the Being of God in Himself. And when ’the Word’ and ’the Life’ are brought within the sphere of human existence, this action is characteristically described: ’the Life was manifested’: ’the Word became flesh.’

Nothing is said in either passage directly of the Holy Spirit. But His action is involved in the phrase ἦν πρὸς in such a connexion. He is, so to seek a definite expression for the idea, the Mediating Power through Whom the love that goes forth is perfectly united with the love that answers. He gives unity to the Life, which we can only conceive of in fragments.

It will be evident that this view of the nature of God prepares the way for revelation. The Word, Who is God (θεός and not ὁ θεός as in Sabellian teaching), has a personal Being and can make the Father known (1 John ii. 22 ff.). The Spirit, Who is God, has a personal Being, and can make the Son known (John xiv. 26, xvi. 14). At the same time, while this fulness of life fulfilled in God Himself is disclosed to us, the divine unity is maintained as essential and not numerical. The Word and the Spirit are both spoken of in personal relations to ‘God’ (John i. 1; 32 f.). That is when the Persons in the Godhead are recognised, the unity of God is simultaneously affirmed.

Such glimpses are opened to us of the absolute tri-personality of God as preparatory to the account of the historical Gospel by St John, but elsewhere, like the other apostolic writers, he deals with the Trinity revealed in the work of Redemption (the ‘Economic Trinity’). The Father is spoken of in His relation to the Incarnate Son, and through Him to men. The Son is spoken of as manifested to men through the Incarnation in the union of the two natures (yet comp. John v. 26). The Holy Spirit is spoken of as ‘proceeding’ on His Mission to the Church (John xv. 26 note), sent by the Father and by the Son; and taking of that which is the Son’s to declare to men (John xiv. 26, xv. 26, xvi. 14; 1 John ii. 20 f., 27). The truths are stated side by side in connexion with our creation, redemption, sanctification; and we are enabled to see that they answer in some way, which we have no power to determine adequately, to the very Being of God as He is in Himself.

The maintenance of the supreme Sovereignty of One God (μοναρχία) in this tri-personality has to be guarded against a twofold tendency to error: (1) towards a distinction in essence between God and Christ (the Father and the Son); and (2) towards a confusion of the Persons of the Father and the Son and the Spirit. The first error found its typical expression in Arianism: the second in Sabellianism. The first has affinities with Polytheism by introducing the idea of a subordinate Divinity. The second has affinities with Pantheism, as seeing in things transitory manifestations

This tri-personality opens the way for revelation.

Elsewhere St John speaks of ’the Economic Trinity.’

The dualism of the subordination of the Son in Person not in essence.

of the Person of God. Both rest upon a false Neo-Judaic conception of Monotheism.

The authority of St John has been brought forward in support of each of these views: for the first John xiv. 28 (see note, and compare Athanas. de Syn. § 28); and for the second John x. 30 (see note, and compare Tertull. adr. Prax. cc. xx. xxii.). It must however be noticed that the great Greek Fathers understood the first passage of the Personal Subordination of the Son as Son to the Father in the one equal and absolute Godhead. And this view, which has been obscured in the West by the teaching of Augustine, is of the highest importance; for it leads to the apprehension of the fitness of the mediatorial and consummative work of the Son. The assumption of humanity and the laying aside of the divine conditions of existence by the Son are everywhere spoken of by St John as voluntary acts. They correspond therefore to the Being of the Son as Son, for we cannot conceive of the Father or of the Spirit as Incarnate. In other words the unchanged and unchangeable ‘I’ of the Word, the Son, includes either the potentiality or the fact of the Incarnation, the union with the finite.

1 John 5:21

4. A final Warning (21).

From the thought of ‘Him that is true’ St John turns almost of necessity to the thought of the vain shadows which usurp His place. In them the world asserted its power. They forced themselves into notice on every side in innumerable shapes, and tempted believers to fall away from the perfect simplicity of faith. One sharp warning therefore closes the Epistle of which the main scope has been to deepen the fellowship of man with God and through God with man.

²¹ Little children, guard yourselves from idols.

21. Τεκνία] Once again the anxiety of the Apostle calls up the title of affection which has not been used since iv. 4. See ii. 1 note.

φυλάξατε ἑαυτὰ] custodite vos V., guard yourselves. The exact phrase is not found again in the N. T. Compare τηρεῖν ἑαυτόν Jude 21; and with an adj. James i. 27; 2 Cor. xi. 9; 1 Tim. v. 22. This ‘guarding’ of the Christian answers to the ‘keeping’ of Christ (v. 8). The use of the active with the reflexive pronoun as distinguished from the middle (Lc. xii. 15 φυλάσσεσθε ἀπὸ π. πλεονεξίας) emphasises the duty of personal effort. The use of the neuter (ἑαυτὰ) in direct agreement with τεκνία seems to be unique. For the use of ἑαυτὰ with the second person see c. i. 8 n. The aorist imp. (φυλάξατε) is remarkable: compare 1 Pet. ii. 17 for its exact force. Elsewhere in the Epistle (except iii. 1) St John always uses the present.

ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδ.] a simulacris V. The word εἴδωλον is comparatively infrequent in the N. T., and elsewhere it is always used literally (e.g. 1 Thess. i. 9). But ‘idolatry’ (Col. iii. 5) and ‘idolater’ (Eph. v. 5) have a wider sense in St Paul; and the context here seems to require a corresponding extension of the meaning of the term. An ‘idol’ is anything which occupies the place due to God. The use of the definite article calls up all the familiar objects which fall under the title. The command to Christians is not generally to keep themselves from such things as idols (ἀπὸ εἰδ.) but from the well-known objects of a false devotion. Compare 2 Cor. vi. 16 μετὰ eἴδωλων with Rom. ii. 22 ὁ βδελυσσ. τὰ εἴδωλα.

This comprehensive warning is probably the latest voice of Scripture.