Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 John 3:9 - 3:9
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
1Jn_3:9. Antithesis of the preceding verse; yet what was there the subject is here—in its opposite—the predicate, and what was there the predicate is here the subject.
πᾶς ὁ γεγεννημένος ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ ] Antithesis to him who is ἐκ τοῦ διαβόλου (1Jn_3:8); “by πᾶς the general signification of the clause is indicated” (Braune); ἁμαρτίαν οὐ ποιεῖ ] is used in the same sense as οὐχ ἁμαρτάνει , 1Jn_3:6. To be born of God and to commit sin are mutually exclusive contraries; for ὁ Θεὸς φῶς ἐστι , καὶ σκοτία ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν οὐδεμία , chap. 1Jn_1:5; comp. also chap. 1Jn_2:29; the child is of the same nature with him of whom he is born. For confirmation of the thought, John adds: ὅτι σπέρμα αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ μένει . Both the deeper context and the expression itself are opposed to the interpretation of these words, according to which σπέρμα is explained = τέκνον , and ἐν αὐτῷ = ἐν Θεῷ (Bengel, Lauge, Sander, Steinhofer); for if the apostle meant to say that “a child of God remains in God,” he would certainly not have exchanged the word τέκνον , which so naturally would suggest itself just here, for another word, unusual in this sense. By σπέρμα Θεοῦ is rather to be understood the divine element of which the new man is produced[212] (comp. Gospel of Joh_1:13), and which, as the essence of his being, keeps him from sin. According to many commentators (Clemens Al., Augustin, Bede, Luther I.,[213] Spener, Grotius, Besser, Weiss, Ewald, etc.), this is the word of God, in favour of which appeal is made not only to the parable of the sower (Matthew 13), but also to 1Pe_1:23 and Jam_1:18. But that parable can here so much the less be adduced, as in it the reference is to the seed of plants; but here, as the allusion to the idea γεγεννημένος shows, “the comparison is made to the seed of human birth, as in Joh_1:13” (Neander); and in the two other passages the word is not represented so much as the seed, but as the means of producing the new life.[214] It is scarcely to be doubted that the apostle was here thinking of the Holy Spirit; the only question is whether he means the Spirit Himself, the ΠΝΕῦΜΑ ἍΓΙΟΝ in His divine personality (so Beza: sic vocatur Spiritus sanctus, quod ejus virtute tanquam ex semine quodam novi homines efficiamur; Düsterdieck, and Myrberg; also, perhaps, Lücke and de Wette), or the Spirit infused by Him into the heart of man, the germ of life communicated to his nature (Hornejus: nativitatis novae indoles; Semler: nova quaedam et sanctior natura; so also Ebrard, Braune, and others). The figurative expression is more in favour of the second view than of the first, only this germ of life must not, on the one hand, be regarded as something separate from the Holy Spirit Himself,[215] nor, on the other hand, as love (a Lapide, Lorinus), for this is the life which has proceeded from the σπέρμα , but not the ΣΠΈΡΜΑ itself.
The thought that he who is born of God does not commit sin is still further emphasized by the words ΚΑῚ Οὐ ΔΎΝΑΤΑΙ ἉΜΑΡΤΆΝΕΙΝ , whereby, of course, not the physical, but no doubt the moral impossibility of sinning is described; both ideas, ἉΜΑΡΤΆΝΕΙΝ as well as Οὐ ΔΎΝΑΤΑΙ , are to be retained in their proper meaning, and not to be arbitrarily perverted; ἉΜΑΡΤΆΝΕΙΝ must here, just as little as in 1Jn_3:6, be restricted to mortal sins (a Lapide, Gagnejus), or to “sinning in the way in which they who are of the devil sin” (Besser), or “to sinning knowingly and wilfully” (Ebrard), or even merely to the violatio charitatis (Augustin, Bede); but just as little is the pointedness and definiteness of Οὐ ΔΎΝΑΤΑΙ to be weakened and to be explained = aegre, difficulter potest, or similarly,[216] for the apostle here wants to bring out the absolute antagonism which exists in general between being born of God and committing sin (so also Braune); comp. on 1Jn_3:6. With regard to the question as to the relationship of the thought expressed here to Heb_6:4 ff., comp. the remark on chap. 1Jn_2:19.
As in the case of the first thought of this verse, so here to this second one a confirmatory clause is added, namely: ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ ΓΕΓΈΝΝΗΤΑΙ ; it is true, the idea of the subject seems to be here repeated (similarly Joh_3:31 : Ὃ ὪΝ ἘΚ Τῆς Γῆς , ἘΚ Τῆς Γῆς ἘΣΤΙ ), but here ἘΚ ΤΟῦ ΘΕΟῦ is put first, whereas in the subject it follows ΓΕΓΕΝΝΗΜΈΝΟς , by which that idea is strongly accentuated; Bengel: priora verba: ex Deo, majorem habent in pronunciando accentum, quod ubi observatur, patet, non idem per idem probari, collato initio verso. The sense therefore is: Because he is born of God (comp. chap. 1Jn_1:5), he who is born of God, i.e. the believer, cannot sin.
[212] Frommann (p. 170) incorrectly interprets σπέρμα of the divine light originally dwelling in man, by which he is distinguished from the rest of creation; for the subject here is not men as such, but the τέκνα τοῦ Θεοῦ .
[213] In his 2d edition Luther says: “He calls the cause of our change a seed, not a full car of corn, but what is cast into the ground, and must first die there; from thence there now results true repentance, so that it is accordingly said: he cannot sin.”
[214] Weiss appeals to chap. 1Jn_2:14; but from the fact that John there says: ὁ λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐν ὑμῖν μένει , it does not follow that σπέρμα is here = ὁ λόγος τ . Θ .; so much the less as there is no reference there to being born of God. It is more appropriate in connection with σπέρμα to refer to chap. 1Jn_2:27.
[215] Brückner inversely first interprets σπέρμα as the πνιῦμα τ . Θ ., but then adds: “and, indeed, in this way, that the principle of life which operates on man is at the same time regarded as the germ of life planted in man.”
[216] Grotius explains: res de qua agitur aliena est ab ejusmodi ingenio; Paulus: “not absolutely impossible, but: his whole spirituality and habit (!) are opposed to it.”