Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 John 2:3 - 2:3
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
1Jn_2:3. Semler would make a new section begin here: “after the foundation of salvation has been spoken of, there follows the exhortation to preserving the salvation;” incorrectly; 1Jn_2:3 is closely connected with chap. 1Jn_1:5-6, and states in what the Christian’s walk in light consists; therefore also it begins simply with καί .
ἐν τούτῳ γινώσκομεν ] ἐν τούτῳ refers to the following ἐάν ; the object is stated by ὅτι ; the same combination is found in the Gospel of Joh_13:35; similarly in chap. 1Jn_4:13, where, however, the particle ὅτι is used instead of ἐάν , and chap. 1Jn_5:2, where ὅταν is used. A Lapide wrongly weakens the force of γινώσκομεν : non certo et demonstrative, sed probabiliter et conjecturaliter; it is rather the anxiety of the apostle to bring out that the Christian has a sure and certain consciousness of the nature of the Christian life. This certainty is confirmed to him by unmistakeable facts, in which the truth of his knowledge attests itself.
ὅτι ἐγνώκαμεν αὐτόν ] αὐτόν seems to refer to the last-mentioned subject in 1Jn_2:2, therefore to Christ; so it is explained by Oecumenius, Erasmus, Grotius, Calov, Spener, Bengel, Semler, Johannsen, Sander, Myrberg, Erdmann, etc.; but the deeper train of thought is opposed to this; John is not continuing the idea of 1Jn_2:2, but is going back to the fundamental thought of the whole section: “He who has fellowship with God walks in the light;” the principal subject is God, and to it, therefore, αὐτόν is to be referred; so Calvin, Beza, Lücke, Baumgarten-Crusius, Ewald, de Wette, Brückner, Ebrard, Düsterdieck, Braune, etc.[90]
On ἘΓΝΏΚΑΜΕΝ , which is not, with Lange and Carpzov, to be interpreted = “love,” the commentators rightly remark that it is not a mere external, purely theoretical knowledge that is to be understood by it;[91] it is the living knowledge that is meant, i.e. a knowledge in which the subject (God) is really received into the inner life, and thought and action are determined by it,[92] so that ἐγνωκέναι is necessarily connected with the κοινωνίαν ἔχειν μετʼ αὐτοῦ (chap. 1Jn_1:6); still it is inexact to render ὅτι ἐγνώκαμεν αὐτόν , with Oecumenius, directly by ὅτι συνεκράθημεν αὐτῷ , or, with Clarius, by societatem habemus cum eo. By ἐγνώκαμεν the element of consciousness in the fellowship, and with this its internal and spiritual side, is brought out.
ἐὰν τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ τηρῶμεν ] The expression τ . ἐντολ . τηρεῖν [93] describes the obedience resulting from the internal faithful keeping of the commandments;[94] it is incorrect, with Braune, so to press the idea τηρεῖν here, in its distinction from ποιεῖν , that merely “attention to the commandments” is to be understood by it; it rather includes in itself the actual obedience. This obedience is not here regarded as the means of the knowledge of God, but as the proof of it; rightly Oecumenius: διὰ τῶν ἔργων ἡ τελεία δεδείκνυται ἀγάπη ; only he should have said “ γνῶσις ” instead of ἀγάπη . Between both of those there is the same relationship as between fellowship with God and walking in light; for as the former is related to the knowledge of God, so is the latter related to the observance of the divine commandments, which is the concrete embodiment of ἐν τῷ φωτὶ περιπατεῖν .
[90] The reason brought forward by Ebrard: “it lies also in the idea of the commandments, that they are mentioned as commandments of the Father and not of the Son,” is not valid; comp. Gospel of Joh_14:15; Joh_14:21; Joh_14:23; Joh_15:10. Ebrard, on the other hand, rightly points to ver. 6, where ἐκεῖνος (Christ) is distinguished from αὐτός . From this verse it also follows that John, in this section, is considering Christ not as having given commandments, but as having walked according to the commandments of God.
[91] Lorinus: cognoscere cum quadam voluntatis propendentis approbatione.—A Lapide: cognitione non tantum speculativa, sed et practica, quae cum amore et affectu conjuncta est, ac in opus derivatur.—Spener: “This is not a mere knowing (1Co_8:1), such as may exist without love, but a knowledge which comes into the heart and fulfils His will with trust.”—De Wette: “Knowledge of the heart, not of the mind, wherewith activity is also assumed.”—Lücke: “the knowledge of God in the highest sense; not, however, in so far as it is identical with the love of God, but only in so far as it really impels men practically to fulfilment of the divine commands, and thus reveals itself in growing love to the God who is known as the Light.”
[92] Weiss not unjustly contends against the current view of γινώσκειν in John, in so far as the idea of knowledge is not kept pure in it from confusion with other ideas; but when Weiss says that in John only “the knowledge that rests on immediate contemplation is to be thought of,” and observes that “it lies in the nature of the case, that in this intuition and contemplation the object is received into the entire spiritual being of man as a—nay, as the determining power,” he not only agrees with the explanation given above, but defines the idea in such a way as not to deviate so very far from the commentators whom he opposes as his polemic would lead one to suppose.
[93] It is to be noticed, that to describe the Christian commandments John never uses νόμος (which by him is only used in reference to the Mosaic Law), but generally ἐντολαί (only now and then λόγος Θεοῦ or Χριστοῦ ); and as verb, τηρεῖν , never ποιεῖν (except in Rev_22:14).—In the writings of Paul, τηρεῖν ἑντολήν appears only in 1Ti_6:14, and besides in the N. T. in Mat_19:17 (Mat_28:20 : τηρεῖν πάντα ὅσα ἐνετειλάμην ὑμῖν ).
[94] The paraphrase of Semler may be given here merely for its curiosity: Si (nos Apostoli) retinemus et magnifacimus hanc ejus doctrinam: Deum esse pariter omnium gentium.