Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - 1 John 4:12 - 4:12
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
1Jn_4:12. The blessing of brotherly love is perfect fellowship with God.
Θεὸν οὐδεὶς πώποτε τεθέαται ] comp. 1Jn_4:20 and Gospel of Joh_1:18. In opposition to Rickli’s view, that these words were spoken in polemic reference to the false teachers who pretended to see God, i.e. to know Him fully, Lücke rightly asserts that in that case the apostle would have more definitely expressed the polemic element; τεθέαται does not here at all denote spiritual seeing or knowledge (Hornejus, Neander, Sander, Erdmann), but seeing in the strict sense of the word (de Wette, Düsterdieck, Braune). John, however, does not here emphasize this invisibility of God (in which He is infinitely exalted above man; comp. 1Ti_6:16) in order to suggest that we can reciprocate the love of God, not directly, but only through love to our visible brethren (Lücke, Ebrard; similarly Hornejus, Lange, etc.), but in order thereby to emphasize still more the following: ὁ Θεὸς ἐν ἡμῖν μένει κ . τ . λ . as the Scholiast in Matthiae indicates by paraphrasing: ὁ ἀόρατος Θεὸς καὶ ἀνέφικτος διὰ τῆς εἰς ἀλλήλους ἀγάπης ἐν ἡμῖν μένει ; a Lapide correctly interprets: licet eum non videamus, tamen, si proximum diligamus, ipse invisibilis erit nobis praesentissimus (so also de Wette, Düsterdieck, Erdmann, Myrberg, Braune). The πώποτε which is added shows that τεθέαται is regarded as the simple perfect, and does not “include past and present” (Lücke); nevertheless with the thought: “no one has seen God at any time,” the further thought: “no one can see Him,” is tacitly combined. That the apostle had in view the passage Exo_33:20 (Sander), is the more improbable, as both thought and expression are different. In reference to the appearances of God which the O. T. in Gen_12:7; Gen_17:1, and elsewhere, relates, Spener rightly remarks: “All such was not the seeing of the Divine Being Himself, but of an assumed form in which His being manifested itself.”
ἐὰν ἀγαπῶμεν ἀλλήλους , ὁ Θεὸς ἐν ἡμῖν μένει ] In these words the blessing of brotherly love is stated: With brotherly love fellowship with God is associated, because, indeed, love is of God. The explanation of several commentators: “if we love one another, then it may thereby be known that God is in us,” weakens the thought of the apostle.[267] God’s dwelling in us is certainly not meant to be represented here as a result or fruit of our love to one another (as Frommann, p. 109, interprets); and just as little is it the converse relation; but it is the inseparable co-dependence of the two elements, which mutually condition each other (so also Braune).
ΚΑῚ Ἡ ἈΓΆΠΗ ΑὐΤΟῦ ΤΕΤΕΛΕΙΩΜΈΝΗ ἘΣΤῚΝ ἘΝ ἩΜῖΝ ] Ἡ ἈΓΆΠΗ ΑὐΤΟῦ is not here “the love which God has to us” (Calovius, Spener, Russmeyer, Sander, Erdmann, etc.), for the idea ΤΕΤΕΛΕΙΩΜΈΝΗ ἘΣΤΊΝ does not agree with this, comp. 1Jn_4:18, but the love which the believer has; ΑὐΤΟῦ may, however, be either the objective genitive (so most commentators) or the subjective genitive; but in the latter case we must not interpret, with Socinus: “ea dilectio, quam ipse Deus nobis praescripsit,” nor, as Calvin thinks probable: “caritas, quam Deus nobis inspirat,” but “the love which is inherent in God” (which is His nature and ἐξ αὐτοῦ ); this, however, considered as dwelling in believers ( ἘΝ ἩΜῖΝ ) as the soul of their life (so also Brückner and Braune). This explanation, in which no object which would restrict the general idea of love has to be supplied (comp. 1Jn_4:7-8; 1Jn_4:16; 1Jn_4:18), deserves the preference, because the specific love to God is first mentioned in 1Jn_4:19. Quite unjustifiably Ebrard asserts that Ἡ ἈΓ . ΑὐΤΟῦ denotes “the mutual loving relationship between God and us; comp. 1Jn_2:5.”
[267] Weiss insists on this interpretation, because “it is meant to be shown how we have in brotherly love the visible evidence of an existence of God who is in Himself invisible;” incorrectly, for (1) Christians need no visible proof of the existence of the invisible God, and, besides, it is not the existence of God, but God’s dwelling in us, etc., that is the subject here; (2) the conjunction ἐάν shows that the subordinate clause states the condition under which what is stated in the principal clause takes place; (3) the supplement of a γινώσκομεν is purely arbitrary.