Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 John 2:26 - 2:26
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
1Jn_2:26. ταῦτα refers to all that the apostle has written about the antichrists from 1Jn_2:18 down. In calling them here οἱ πλανῶντες ὑμᾶς , he gives it to be understood that their efforts were directed to seduce the Church from the truth of the gospel to their lie; that their purpose had actual effect (Braune) is not indicated by the verb.—1Jn_2:27. In the first part of this verse the apostle testifies to his readers that they do not need any teacher, in which he goes back to what he had already expressed in 1Jn_2:20-21.
καὶ ὑμεῖς ] καί is here used just as in 1Jn_2:20.
On the anacolouthon, see on 1Jn_2:24.
τὸ χρῖσμα ὃ ἐλάβετε ἀπʼ αὐτοῦ ] τὸ χρῖσμα is, with Braune, to be regarded as the accusative, for the juxtaposition of two nominatives could not be explained; the apostle probably had an ἔχετε in his mind, instead of which, however, he then wrote μένει ἐν ὑμῖν ; αὐτοῦ , i.e. Χριστοῦ ; so the context demands; αὐτός , 1Jn_2:25. Herein lies a proof that τοῦ ἁγίου in 1Jn_2:20 is to be understood of Christ.
ἐν ὑμῖν μένει ] The indicative, instead of which the imperative is used in 1Jn_2:24, expresses the certain confidence of the apostle.
καὶ οὐ χρείαν ἔχετε ] This sentence, which by καί is made co-ordinate with the preceding, stands to it in the relation of conclusion; meaning: since, as is not to be doubted, the Spirit is in you—and abiding—you do not need; Bengel describes this relation correctly by: et ideo.
ἵνα τις διδάσκῃ ὑμᾶς ] ἵνα is used here, as not unfrequently in the N. T., in an enfeebled signification; only in an artificial way could the original force of purpose of this particle be here retained; while this force sometimes passes over into that of object, this is still further weakened, so that the clause beginning with ἵνα is the object which completes the idea of the verb; so it is here; comp. especially Heb_5:12 : χρείαν ἔχετε τοῦ διδάσκειν ὑμᾶς ; in other passages χρ . ἔχειν is used even with the simple infinitive, Mat_3:14; Mat_14:16; 1Th_1:8; 1Th_4:9; with ἵνα as here, Joh_16:30.[179]
Several commentators suppose here a reference to the false teachers, so that in the words of the apostle there lies a warning against those who wish to impose themselves on the Church as teachers; so a Lapide, Spener, ( τίς = “who may make pretence of a new revelation”), Sander, Gerlach, Besser, and others. But it is more appropriate (according to 1Jn_2:21) to refer the apostle’s word to a teaching proceeding from himself or other apostolic teachers; so Hornejus, de Wette-Brückner, Lücke, Düsterdieck, Braune, etc.—only we must not restrict the generally expressed thought merely to instruction about the false teachers, even though it is intended with special reference to that.[180] Believers need no human teacher in order that the divine truth may be made known to them. They have received, with the word which was declared unto them ( ὃ ἤκουσαν ), the χρῖσμα , which leads them εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν ; therefore the apostle frequently in this Epistle emphasizes the fact that he does not want to instruct them, but is writing to them what they already know ( οἴδατε πάντα , 1Jn_2:20). John thereby assumes believing readers, in whose hearts that which they have heard from the beginning is preserved true and uncorrupted. Nothing new therefore can be proclaimed to the believers, but only that which they already possess in faith may be brought to a clearer consciousness.[181]
ἈΛΛʼ Ὡς ΤῸ ΑὐΤῸ ΧΡῖΣΜΑ Κ . Τ . Λ .] In this second part of the verse the first question is about the construction. Lücke, Ewald, de Wette, Neander, Düsterdieck, Braune (and previously Oecumenius and Theophylact) think that the whole to the end of the verse forms one period, in which the premise ἀλλʼ ὡς … διδάσκει is resumed by the words ΚΑῚ ΚΑΘῺς ἘΔΊΔΑΞΕΝ ὙΜῖΝ , and has its conclusion in ΜΕΝΕῖΤΕ (or ΜΈΝΕΤΕ ) ἘΝ ΑὐΤῷ , and in which the words ΚΑῚ ἈΛΗΘῈς … ΨΕῦΔΟς contain a parenthetical adjunct. The difficulty that in the resumed premise ΚΑΊ is put instead of ἈΛΛΆ , ΚΑΘΏς instead of Ὡς , and the aorist ἘΔΊΔΑΞΕΝ instead of the present ΔΙΔΆΣΚΕΙ , can certainly be easily got over by the fact that the apostle wanted not simply to repeat the thought, but at the same time to bring out a new phase of the subject; but the additional ΠΕΡῚ ΠΆΝΤΩΝ , which does not stand in any relationship whatever to the conclusion ΜΕΝΕῖΤΕ ( ΜΈΝΕΤΕ ), is decidedly opposed to this construction; to this is added that ἈΛΛΆ indicates that the apostle wants to express a contrast to the οὐ χρείαν ἔχετε κ . τ . λ ., that is, a clause in which the teaching of the ΧΡῖΣΜΑ is described as such as removes the need of any other (human) teacher; finally, that the subordinate clause ΚΑῚ ΟὐΚ ἜΣΤΙ ΨΕῦΔΟς conjoined with ἈΛΗΘΈς ἘΣΤΙ raises this thought above the level of a mere parenthetical adjunct, and stamps it as a leading thought. For these reasons it is preferable, with Luther, Calvin, Baumgarten-Crusius, Sander, Brückner, Besser, and in general most of the commentators, to divide the whole into two parts, and to regard ΚΑῚ ἈΛΗΘ . ἘΣΤΙ … ΨΕῦΔΟς as the conclusion of the first part; Luther: “but as the anointing teaches you all things, it is true, and is no lie; and,” etc.[182]
ὡς refers not so much to the form and fashion, as to the substance of the teaching.
ΤῸ ΑὐΤῸ ΧΡῖΣΜΑ ] ΤῸ ΑὐΤΌ is not idem semper, non aliud atque aliud, sed sibi constans et idem apud sanctos omnes (Bengel; so also Erdmann), but: just the same χρῖσμα , namely Ὁ ἘΛΆΒΕΤΕ . Still the reading ΑὐΤΟῦ might be preferable, for it seems unnecessary to emphasize the fact that the ΧΡῖΣΜΑ is the same that they have received, and no other.
ΠΕΡῚ ΠΆΝΤΩΝ is used in the same sense as ΠΆΝΤΑ , 1Jn_2:20.
ΚΑῚ ἈΛΗΘΈς ἘΣΤΙ Κ . Τ . Λ .] ΚΑΊ before the conclusion, as in 1Jn_2:24 : “then it is also true,” etc.; it brings out prominently the idea ἀληθές ; ἀληθές is referred to ΤῸ ΧΡῖΣΜΑ by Lücke, de Wette, Brückner, Düsterdieck, Ebrard, Ewald, Braune, and others; but the substantive ΨΕῦΔΟς is opposed to this connection, for it cannot be referred to ΤῸ ΧΡῖΣΜΑ , inasmuch as it is considered by John as a person ( ΔΙΔΆΣΚΕΙ ), and must neither be arbitrarily explained, with Beza, by ΨΕΥΔΈς , nor, with Braune, be separated from ἈΛΗΘΈς (“and there is no lie in it”); Oecumenius, Theophylact, Luther, Neander, Besser, Erdmann, and others, have therefore rightly referred ἈΛΗΘΈς Κ . Τ . Λ . to that which the ΧΡῖΣΜΑ teaches. Because this is true, and is no ΨΕῦΔΟς , therefore believers do not need any teacher besides, but they may rely entirely upon the teaching of the ΧΡῖΣΜΑ . To this thought the apostle further adds a new one, in which he goes back to the end of 1Jn_2:24.
ΚΑῚ ΚΑΘΏς ] ΚΑΘΏς , as distinct from Ὡς , means: “in proportion as.”
ἐδίδαξεν ὑμᾶς ] namely, ἈΠʼ ἈΡΧῆς .
ΜΈΝΕΤΕ ( ΜΕΝΕῖΤΕ ) ἘΝ ΑὐΤῷ ] The Recepta μενεῖτε is taken by Socinus, a Lapide, Lorinus, Semler, and others, in the sense of the imperative; others retain the future meaning, as in 1Jn_2:24; thus Beza says: mihi videtur omnino servanda Futuri propria significatio ut est optime sperantis; as the apostle thereby expresses his good confidence, the future accordingly has the vim consolandi (Bengel). The correct reading, however, is ΜΈΝΕΤΕ , which, corresponding to the preceding ΜΈΝΕΙ and ἜΧΕΤΕ , is not imperative (Ewald, Braune), but indicative (Brückner), and as such it expresses the firm conviction of the apostle that they, according to the constant instruction of the ΧΡῖΣΜΑ , abide ἘΝ ΑὐΤῷ , i.e. in Christ (Erasmus erroneously: = ἐν τῷ χρίσματι , and Baumgarten-Crusius: “in the teaching which the ΧΡῖΣΜΑ communicates to them”). In favour of this view is also the exhortation of 1Jn_2:28 herewith connected.[183]
[179] At the most it may be said that ἵνα is used with the verb χρείαν ἔχειν , because that of which one is in need may be regarded as the object of his need; on the other hand, it is unsuitable when Braune says: “the teaching is here regarded as the object and purpose for the sake of the position of him who is to be taught.”
[180] Lücke paraphrases the passage: “The reason why I do not write any more about the false teachers, is that I assume that that holy unction of the Spirit remains in you; and if that is so, you do not need that any one shall instruct you further on the subject.”
[181] Several commentators rightly remark here, that in the statement of the apostle there is no foundation for the error of the “enthusiasts,” inasmuch as John does not separate the teaching of the χρῖσμα and the apostolic word from one another, but places them in the closest connection.
[182] Ebrard makes ὡς dependent upon ἔγραψα , ver. 26; it is true he himself admits that this gives a “laxe and legere form of speech,” but he thinks that there is “nothing strange” in this, because the apostle is speaking to children in quite childlike language. But what child’s understanding would be capable of supplying with the words: “but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things,” the thought: “sc. I have said to you”?
[183] Myrberg on ver. 28: Sperantis verba illa sunt, quae paullo ante leguntur; haec adhortantis, quod novum quoddam initium dicendi indicat.