Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 John 4
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
The reading in B: ἐληλυθέναι , instead of the Rec. ἐληλυθότα , is a correction.—1Jn_4:3. Instead of the Rec. ὁμολογεῖ Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐν σαρκὶ ἐληλυθότα (K, etc., and G, though with the article τόν prefixed), A B, etc., have the simple τὸν Ἰησοῦν (Lachm. Tisch.). This is probably the original reading (Brückner), and is confirmed by the preceding (contrary to Reiche, etc.). à reads: Ἰησοῦν κύριον ἐν σ . ἐληλυθότα .
According to Socrates, vii. chap. 32, ὃ λύει is found in old manuscripts instead of ὁ μὴ ὀμολογεῖ ; the same reading in Iren. iii. 18: qui solvit Jesum Christum; similarly the Vulg. (Lucif.: destruit) and in Fulg.
Tertullian also prefers this reading, though in connection with the common one; Adv. Marc. v. 16: negantes Christum in carne venisse … hic antichristus est; the same connection in Tychonius and Augustine: qui solvit Jesum et negat in carne venisse. Semler’s view is a strange one, that ὃ λύει has arisen oculorum vitio; the reading is probably to be explained by the polemic against the Gnostics (Grotius, Lücke, de Wette), in favour of which is the Scholion in Matthaei, p. 225: προώδευσαν γὰρ αὐτοῦ ( τοῦ ἀντιχριστοῦ ) αἱ αἱρέσεις , ὧν χαρακτεριστικὸν τὸ διὰ ψευδοπροφητῶν καὶ πνευμάτων λύειν τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐν τῷ μὴ ὁμολογεῖν αὐτὸν ἐν σαρκ . ἐληλυθέναι .
The reading in à : ὄτι ( ὅ τι ) ἀκηκόαμεν , instead of ὃ ἀκηκόατε , is singular.—1Jn_4:6. In his small edition Lachm., after A, Vulg. etc., reads ἐν τούτῳ instead of ἐκ τούτου ; in his large edition he has accepted the latter reading.—1Jn_4:7. To ἀγαπῶν is wrongly added in A: τὸν Θεόν .—1Jn_4:8. Instead of ἔγνω , à * has ἔγνωκεν ; in the original text of à the whole sentence: ὁ μὴ ἀγ .… Θεόν , is wanting.—1Jn_4:9. à has ζῶμεν for ζήσωμεν .—1Jn_4:10. To ἡ ἀγάπη is added in à : τοῦ Θεοῦ , plainly a correction. For ἠγαπήσαμεν , B has ἠγαπήκαμεν (Buttm.).
For ἀπέστειλεν , à has ἀπέσταλκεν .—1Jn_4:12. The order of words varies: the Rec. is τετελειωμένη ἐστὶν ἐν ἡμῖν , following G, K, etc. (Tisch.); A, etc., Vulg. etc., have ἐν ἡμῖν before τετελειωμένη (Lachm.); B and à : ἐν ἡμῖν between τετελ . and ἐστίν (Buttm.).—1Jn_4:15. B reads ὃς ἐάν instead of ὃς ἄν , and Ἰησοῦς Χριστός instead of the simple Ἰησοῦς .—1Jn_4:16. At the end of the verse B G K à , etc., several vss. etc., read μένει (bracketed by Lachm.); in A, etc., Vulg., several Fathers, μένει is wanting (Tisch.); according to the authorities it is to be regarded as gennine, being probably omitted to correspond with the end of the 15th verse (Reiche).—1Jn_4:17. à has after μεθʼ ἡμῶν the further words: ἐν ἡμῖν , and instead of ἐσμέν the future ἐσόμεθα .—1Jn_4:19. The Rec. ἡμεῖς ἀγαπῶμεν αὐτόν , ὅτι αὐτός is found in G K, etc.; in A is found: ἡμεῖς οὖν ἀγαπῶμεν , ὅτι ὁ Θεός (Lachm.); in B ἡμεῖς ἀγαπῶμεν , ὅτι αὐτός (Tisch.); à has ἡμ . ἀγ τὸν Θεόν , ὅτι αὐτός . The αὐτός after ὅτι is sufficiently attested by the authorities; the αὐτόν after ἀγαπῶμεν , on the other hand, appears to be a later addition, added for explanation of the thought. Reiche, however, regards it as genuine; Lücke thinks that if ἀγαπῶμεν is without an object, ὁ Θεός is necessary; this, however, according to John’s usus loquendi, is not the case.—1Jn_4:20. à omits the ὅτι . In reference to the reading ἑόρακεν in Tisch. 7, see on chap. 1Jn_1:1.
Instead of the Rec. (Tisch.) πῶς , à , B, etc., Theb. etc., read οὐ (Lachm.). The interrogative is, however, more expressive than the negative.