- Jul 15, 2022
- 3,554
- 1,510
I know that many do not like to use commentaries or other Biblical tools outside of Scripture.
It is a conviction of mine that God has used men, through Holy Spirit to help interpret and illuminate Scripture to those of us who want a deeper understanding from the original languages, and other aspects of hermeneutics that we are not trained in.
This subject that I am posting about our Lord is very controversial for some reason withing Chrisitanity.
Those who do not confess that Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh are not truly regenerated, I believe the Scripture is clear that they are not of God.
While there are many proofs just from Scripture alone that Jesus is God come in the flesh, the following commentary on 1 John 4:2-3 is just an example of many Godly men and their ministry of interpreting the word.
It is my understanding that 1 John is a series of tests to examine gunuine conversion and fellowship with God and the saints.
2. This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3. but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.
Note the following observations:
(a) Profession John gives his readers a formula for determining whether a spirit comes from God or from the devil: The Christian recognizes the Spirit of God in anyone who openly confesses that Jesus Christ is both human and divine, and that Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God, “has come in the flesh.” Here we have the established principle for testing whether a particular teaching comes from the Holy Spirit (also see 1 Cor. 12:3).
In the Greek, John uses the perfect tense for the words has come to indicate that Jesus came in human nature and even now in heaven he has a human nature. That is, in addition to his divine nature he also has a human nature. Sixteenth-century German theologian Zacharias Ursinus asked whether these two natures are separated from each other. This is his answer:
Certainly not. For since the divinity is not limited and is present everywhere, it is evident that Christ’s divinity is surely beyond the bounds of the humanity he has taken on, but at the same time his divinity is in and remains personally united to his humanity.3
Scripture teaches that the Christ is Jesus, who as our divine redeemer shares our human nature (Heb. 2:14–15). Any teaching that professes the divinity and humanity of Jesus Christ has its origin in God. The opposite is also true; as C. H. Dodd observes, “No utterance, however inspired, which denies the reality of the Incarnation, can be accepted by Christians as true prophecy.”4
(b) Denial Jesus said, “Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven” (Matt. 10:32–33; also see John 8:47; 2 John 7). Anyone who separates the human nature from the divine nature of Jesus Christ speaks without God’s authority. And anyone who denies either Jesus’ human nature or divine nature “is not from God.” Moreover, anyone who teaches that when Jesus was baptized God gave him a divine spirit, and that this spirit left Jesus when he died on the cross distorts the gospel. And last, whoever says that after Jesus’ death God appointed him Son of God fails to present the truth of God’s Word. All such teachers do not speak as representatives of Jesus Christ, have not been commissioned by God, and are not the mouthpieces of the Spirit of God in this world.5
Although John addresses the church of the first century, nothing has changed since that time. Today we have numerous teachers and preachers who deny that Jesus Christ is human and divine. They are not from God, says John. In fact, he labels the spirit of such denial “the spirit of the antichrist.”
(c) Designation John repeats a thought he expressed earlier in the epistle: “The antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come” (2:18; consult also 2 John 7). Now he says, “The antichrist … is coming and even now is already in the world.” He thinks of “all the principles and powers, all the essential characteristics of Antichrist: what … we might call ‘the antichristian nature.’ ”6 That antichristian spirit is here already and expresses itself insidiously and often violently against Jesus Christ and his followers (compare 2 Thess. 2:3–8).
Without exception, liberal theologians refuse to accept the biblical doctrine that Jesus Christ always has been, is, and will be the Son of God, that he came from heaven to redeem his people, that he took upon himself our humanity yet remained truly divine, that he rose bodily from the dead and ascended in his glorified body to heaven, and that he will return at God’s appointed day in the same body in which he ascended. If you compare the teaching of these theologians with God’s Word, you will notice that their opinions are based on human philosophy and not on Scripture. Ask them what they think of the Christ, then go to your Bible and study the teachings of Scripture (Matt. 16:15).
Then there are the members of sects. In pairs they canvass the neighborhood, ring your doorbell, and announce that they are missionaries—even though they do not carry Bibles. When you listen to them, you soon learn that they do not bring the teaching of Christ. The apostle John advises, “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching [of Christ], do not take him into your house or welcome him” (2 John 10).
What does John mean? He means that you may receive the members of the sect into your home only when you intend to teach them about Jesus Christ. Tell them that you are happy in the Lord, because he is your Savior; and that you are pleased to introduce them to Jesus Christ. Then you will be a missionary for the Lord and you are in control of the situation. But if you do not intend to teach these visitors about the Lord, receive them not into your home!
γινώσκετε—the verb can be either indicative or imperative. Although the context calls for the imperative, translators and commentators favor the indicative.
Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν—with reference to the direct object, at least two translations are given: “Jesus as the Christ incarnate” (Moffatt) and “Jesus Christ has come in the flesh” (NIV and other versions). The combination Jesus Christ occurs eight times in John’s epistles (1:3; 2:1; 3:23; 4:2; 5:6, 20; 2 John 3, 7). In two places, John clearly separates the names by writing “Jesus is the Christ” (2:22; 5:1). Therefore, when the names appear together they need to be translated as such.
ἐληλυθότα—the perfect active participle of ἔρχομαι (I come) expresses an action accomplished in the past with lasting effect.
μὴ ὁμολογεῖ—Bruce M. Metzger prefers this reading to λύει “because of overwhelming external support.”7 The use of μή with an indicative instead of οὐ is not uncommon in the New Testament.8
τὸν Ἰησοῦν—the shortest reading is the one given here. Additions to the text are “derived from the previous verse.”9
τό—the definite article needs to be complemented by the noun πνεῦμα.
ἔρχεται—this verb frequently refers to the coming of Christ. Here it stands for the coming of the antichrist.[1]
3 Heidelberg Catechism, question and answer 48.
4 C. H. Dodd, The Johannine Epistles, Moffatt New Testament Commentary series (New York: Harper and Row, 1946), p. 103.
5 Rudolf Schnackenburg considers the wording of verses 2 and 3, because of their distinct contrast, a confession of faith that must be considered original. In short, this confession circulated in the early Christian church. Die Johannesbriefe, Herder’s Theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament series, 7th ed. (Freiburg: Herder, 1984), vol. 13, 3, p. 222.
6 Alfred Plummer, The Epistles of St. John, Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges series (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1896), p. 97.
Moffatt The Bible: A New Translation by James Moffatt
NIV New International Version
7 Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the New Testament, corrected ed. (London and New York: United Bible Societies, 1975), p. 713.
8 Refer to Robertson, Grammar, p. 1169. Also consult C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom-Book of New Testament Greek, 2d ed. (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1960), p. 155.
9 Metzger, Textual Commentary, p. 713.
[1] Simon J. Kistemaker and William Hendriksen, Exposition of James and the Epistles of John, vol. 14, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953–2001), 324–327.
It is a conviction of mine that God has used men, through Holy Spirit to help interpret and illuminate Scripture to those of us who want a deeper understanding from the original languages, and other aspects of hermeneutics that we are not trained in.
This subject that I am posting about our Lord is very controversial for some reason withing Chrisitanity.
Those who do not confess that Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh are not truly regenerated, I believe the Scripture is clear that they are not of God.
While there are many proofs just from Scripture alone that Jesus is God come in the flesh, the following commentary on 1 John 4:2-3 is just an example of many Godly men and their ministry of interpreting the word.
It is my understanding that 1 John is a series of tests to examine gunuine conversion and fellowship with God and the saints.
A Test
4:2–3
4:2–3
2. This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3. but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.
Note the following observations:
(a) Profession John gives his readers a formula for determining whether a spirit comes from God or from the devil: The Christian recognizes the Spirit of God in anyone who openly confesses that Jesus Christ is both human and divine, and that Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God, “has come in the flesh.” Here we have the established principle for testing whether a particular teaching comes from the Holy Spirit (also see 1 Cor. 12:3).
In the Greek, John uses the perfect tense for the words has come to indicate that Jesus came in human nature and even now in heaven he has a human nature. That is, in addition to his divine nature he also has a human nature. Sixteenth-century German theologian Zacharias Ursinus asked whether these two natures are separated from each other. This is his answer:
Certainly not. For since the divinity is not limited and is present everywhere, it is evident that Christ’s divinity is surely beyond the bounds of the humanity he has taken on, but at the same time his divinity is in and remains personally united to his humanity.3
Scripture teaches that the Christ is Jesus, who as our divine redeemer shares our human nature (Heb. 2:14–15). Any teaching that professes the divinity and humanity of Jesus Christ has its origin in God. The opposite is also true; as C. H. Dodd observes, “No utterance, however inspired, which denies the reality of the Incarnation, can be accepted by Christians as true prophecy.”4
(b) Denial Jesus said, “Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven” (Matt. 10:32–33; also see John 8:47; 2 John 7). Anyone who separates the human nature from the divine nature of Jesus Christ speaks without God’s authority. And anyone who denies either Jesus’ human nature or divine nature “is not from God.” Moreover, anyone who teaches that when Jesus was baptized God gave him a divine spirit, and that this spirit left Jesus when he died on the cross distorts the gospel. And last, whoever says that after Jesus’ death God appointed him Son of God fails to present the truth of God’s Word. All such teachers do not speak as representatives of Jesus Christ, have not been commissioned by God, and are not the mouthpieces of the Spirit of God in this world.5
Although John addresses the church of the first century, nothing has changed since that time. Today we have numerous teachers and preachers who deny that Jesus Christ is human and divine. They are not from God, says John. In fact, he labels the spirit of such denial “the spirit of the antichrist.”
(c) Designation John repeats a thought he expressed earlier in the epistle: “The antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come” (2:18; consult also 2 John 7). Now he says, “The antichrist … is coming and even now is already in the world.” He thinks of “all the principles and powers, all the essential characteristics of Antichrist: what … we might call ‘the antichristian nature.’ ”6 That antichristian spirit is here already and expresses itself insidiously and often violently against Jesus Christ and his followers (compare 2 Thess. 2:3–8).
Practical Considerations in 4:1–3
Without exception, liberal theologians refuse to accept the biblical doctrine that Jesus Christ always has been, is, and will be the Son of God, that he came from heaven to redeem his people, that he took upon himself our humanity yet remained truly divine, that he rose bodily from the dead and ascended in his glorified body to heaven, and that he will return at God’s appointed day in the same body in which he ascended. If you compare the teaching of these theologians with God’s Word, you will notice that their opinions are based on human philosophy and not on Scripture. Ask them what they think of the Christ, then go to your Bible and study the teachings of Scripture (Matt. 16:15).
Then there are the members of sects. In pairs they canvass the neighborhood, ring your doorbell, and announce that they are missionaries—even though they do not carry Bibles. When you listen to them, you soon learn that they do not bring the teaching of Christ. The apostle John advises, “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching [of Christ], do not take him into your house or welcome him” (2 John 10).
What does John mean? He means that you may receive the members of the sect into your home only when you intend to teach them about Jesus Christ. Tell them that you are happy in the Lord, because he is your Savior; and that you are pleased to introduce them to Jesus Christ. Then you will be a missionary for the Lord and you are in control of the situation. But if you do not intend to teach these visitors about the Lord, receive them not into your home!
Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 4:2–3
Verse 2
Verse 2
γινώσκετε—the verb can be either indicative or imperative. Although the context calls for the imperative, translators and commentators favor the indicative.
Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν—with reference to the direct object, at least two translations are given: “Jesus as the Christ incarnate” (Moffatt) and “Jesus Christ has come in the flesh” (NIV and other versions). The combination Jesus Christ occurs eight times in John’s epistles (1:3; 2:1; 3:23; 4:2; 5:6, 20; 2 John 3, 7). In two places, John clearly separates the names by writing “Jesus is the Christ” (2:22; 5:1). Therefore, when the names appear together they need to be translated as such.
ἐληλυθότα—the perfect active participle of ἔρχομαι (I come) expresses an action accomplished in the past with lasting effect.
Verse 3
μὴ ὁμολογεῖ—Bruce M. Metzger prefers this reading to λύει “because of overwhelming external support.”7 The use of μή with an indicative instead of οὐ is not uncommon in the New Testament.8
τὸν Ἰησοῦν—the shortest reading is the one given here. Additions to the text are “derived from the previous verse.”9
τό—the definite article needs to be complemented by the noun πνεῦμα.
ἔρχεται—this verb frequently refers to the coming of Christ. Here it stands for the coming of the antichrist.[1]
3 Heidelberg Catechism, question and answer 48.
4 C. H. Dodd, The Johannine Epistles, Moffatt New Testament Commentary series (New York: Harper and Row, 1946), p. 103.
5 Rudolf Schnackenburg considers the wording of verses 2 and 3, because of their distinct contrast, a confession of faith that must be considered original. In short, this confession circulated in the early Christian church. Die Johannesbriefe, Herder’s Theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament series, 7th ed. (Freiburg: Herder, 1984), vol. 13, 3, p. 222.
6 Alfred Plummer, The Epistles of St. John, Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges series (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1896), p. 97.
Moffatt The Bible: A New Translation by James Moffatt
NIV New International Version
7 Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the New Testament, corrected ed. (London and New York: United Bible Societies, 1975), p. 713.
8 Refer to Robertson, Grammar, p. 1169. Also consult C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom-Book of New Testament Greek, 2d ed. (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1960), p. 155.
9 Metzger, Textual Commentary, p. 713.
[1] Simon J. Kistemaker and William Hendriksen, Exposition of James and the Epistles of John, vol. 14, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953–2001), 324–327.