Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 John 3:18 - 3:18
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
1Jn_3:18. True love proves itself by deed. The exhortation contained in this verse is, on the one hand, a deduction from the foregoing (especially from 1Jn_3:16-17); but, on the other hand, it forms the basis of the further development.
τεκνία ] Impressive address before the exhortation.
μὴ ἀγαπῶμεν λόγῳ μηδὲ τῇ γλώσσῃ ] i.e. “let us not so love that the proof of our love is the outward word or the tongue;” μηδὲ τῇ γλώσσῃ is epexegetically added, in order to mark the externality of the love indicated by λόγῳ ἀγαπᾷν , inasmuch as it points out that by λόγος here only the outward word is meant; it is erroneous to regard γλῶσσα as a climax in so far as “one may love with words (without deeds), but in such a way that the words are nevertheless really and sincerely meant” (Ebrard), for John would not in the very least consider as truly and sincerely meant words of love which remain without corresponding deed. The article serves “to vivify the expression” (Lücke): the tongue as the particular member for expression of the word. It is unnecessary, nay, “contrary to the text” (Düsterdieck), with Beza, Lange, Sander, etc., to supply “ μόνον ” with ἀγαπῶμεν κ . τ . λ .; for ἀγαπᾷν λόγῳ κ . τ . λ . in itself expresses the mere apparent love.
ἀλλʼ ἐν ἔργῳ καὶ ἀληθεία ] Instead of the Rec. ἔργῳ , we must read ἐν ἔργῳ ; according to de Wette, the two readings are synonymous; according to Lücke, ἐν ἔργῳ κ . ἀλ . has more of “adverbial nature” than ἔργῳ καὶ ἀληθείᾳ ; “in τῷ λόγῳ the apostle is considering more the way in which love expresses itself, in ἐν ἔργῳ κ . ἀλ . he is considering more the form and fashion of it;” the preposition suggested itself to the apostle because the work, as being the realization of love, stands in an inner relationship to it, “is the element in which love moves” (Düsterdieck).[231] λόγος and ἔργον are frequently in the N. T. connected with one another, so Luk_24:19; Act_7:22, and many other passages; in order to bring out the insufficiency of λόγος in 1Co_4:19-20, 1Th_1:5, δύναμις is contrasted with it. By καὶ ἀληθείᾳ the apostle does not mean to add a second element of love, but to characterize the ἀγαπᾷν ἐν ἔργῳ as the true love (so also Myrberg); a love which does not show itself ἐν ἔργῳ is only an apparent love.[232] The relationship of ( ἘΝ ) ἈΛΗΘΕΊᾼ to ἘΝ ἜΡΓῼ is just the same as that of Τῇ ΓΛΏΣΣῌ to ΛΌΓῼ . The two words of each clause express together one idea, and these two ideas are contrasted with one another, so that it is not to be asked whether λόγῳ corresponds with ἜΡΓῼ , and ΓΛΏΣΣῌ with ἈΛΗΘΕΊᾼ , or ΓΛΏΣΣῌ with ἜΡΓῼ , and ΛΌΓῼ with ἈΛΗΘΕΊᾼ (against Düsterdieck and Braune). With the thought of this verse compare especially Jam_2:15-16; only here the thought is more comprehensive than there.[233]
[231] Braune: “It is to be observed that the first pair in the dative only states the means by which love operates; the preposition ἐν states the clement in which it moves.”
[232] Comp. Joh_4:24, where also “ καὶ ἀληθείᾳ ” is added to ἐν πνεύματι , not to bring out a second element of true worship (contrary to Meyer on this passage), but to describe the προσκυνεῖν ἐν πνεύματι as true worship in contrast to every apparent worship.
[233] Wolf quotes the corresponding statement of Picke, Avoth, chap. 1 John 5 : omnis dilectio, quae dependet a verbo, verbo cessante, ipsa quoque cessat: at quae non dependet a verbo, nunquam cessat.—In Theognis 979 it is put thus: μὴ μοι ἀσηρ εἴη γλώσσῃ φίλος , ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔργῳ .