First John: 1 John 4:6-Two Interpretative Problems Lesson # 157

1 John 4:6 We are from God. Whoever knows God listens to us; whoever is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the Spirit of truth and the spirit of error. (ESV)

1 John 4:6 contains four assertions.

There is an interpretative problem in each of these four assertions, which revolves around the reference for the first person plural form of the personal pronoun egō which appears in the first three assertions and the first person plural form of the ginōskō in the fourth assertion.

There are three possible interpretations: (1) The word refers to the apostles only. (2) It refers to the apostles and all other Christian teachers as opposed to the false teachers. (3) It refers to all Christians.

There are several factors which contribute to the interpretation of this pronoun as a reference to John and the recipients of First John and all Christians.

The first is that the purpose of 1 John 4:1-6 is to help the recipients of First John identify teaching which originates with the Holy Spirit and that which originates with Satan’s kingdom.

Secondly, every member of the Christian community and not just apostles, pastor-teachers and evangelists are obligated to communicate the gospel of Jesus Christ.

In fact, every person in the Christian community and not just those with the gift of teaching or evangelism are obligated to adhere to the Spirit’s testimony that Jesus of Nazareth is the God-man Savior of the world.

However, I believe that the first person plural form of the personal pronoun egō as a reference to John and his fellow apostles, teachers and evangelists.

There are several reasons for this interpretation.

The first is the presence of the verb akouō in the second and third assertions in this verse, which speaks of obedience to a particular teaching.

Secondly, in 1 John 4:4, John employs the second person plural form of the personal pronoun su but in 1 John 4:6, he uses the first person plural form of the personal pronoun egō.

The former is used to affirm that the recipients of First John possessed the characteristic of truth which originates with God the Holy Spirit.

The latter would therefore appear to indicate a contrast between the recipients of First John and the apostle John and his fellow apostles, teachers and evangelists that He is the God-man Savior since in both verses he is speaking of possessing the characteristic of truth which originates with the Holy Spirit.

Why would John assert in 1 John 4:4 that the recipients of First John possessed the characteristic of truth which originates with God the Holy Spirit but not include himself in this assertion as he does in 1 John 4:6?

In other words, why would John repeat himself?

Why assert again that the recipients of First John possessed truth since he already affirmed this in 1 John 4:4?

Why not assert in 1 John 4:4 that he along with the recipients of First John possessed truth in their lives?

The only reasonable explanation as to why John uses hēmeis (ἡμεῖς), “us” in 1 John 4:6 and Hymeis (Ὑμεῖς), “you” in 1 John 4:4 is that he wanted to make a distinction between himself and his fellow apostles, teachers and evangelists and the recipients of First John.

But more than this, he employs hēmeis (ἡμεῖς), “us” in 1 John 4:6 and not hymeis (Ὑμεῖς), “you” because he wants to express a contrast between those who faithfully communicated the Spirit’s testimony about the person of Jesus Christ and those who did not do so.

The former would include himself and his fellow apostles, teachers and evangelists whereas the latter would be the false prophets who are mentioned by John in 1 John 4:5.

The first person plural form of this verb ginōskō in the fourth and final assertion refers to John and the recipients of First John and all Christians since John is attempting to instruct the recipients of First John as to how they and all Christians can be assured that a teaching originates with God the Holy Spirit or Satan.

By using the first person plural form of this verb rather than the second person plural form of this word, the apostle John is identifying with his readers that he is subject to this spiritual truth which he presents here in 1 John 4:6.

It is expressing his unity and solidarity with the recipients of First John.

The latter is emphasizing no exceptions, which indicates that the spiritual truth presented here in verse 6 is emphasizing that there are no exceptions which means that it is applicable to every Christian including the apostle John.

The second interpretative problem is related to the word “God.”

Which member of the Trinity is being referred to with this word?

When John mentions God in this first assertion, he is referring to the Holy Spirit, which is indicated by its articular construction which is anaphoric which means that the article is pointing back to the use of this word in verse 4 indicating that it retains the same referent and meaning when it is used here in verse 6.

In 1 John 4:4, the noun theos refers to the Holy Spirit which is indicated by its articular construction which is anaphoric which means that the article is pointing back to the use of this word at the end of verse 3 indicating that it retains the same referent and meaning when it is used here in verse 4.

In 1 John 4:3, the noun theos again refers to the Spirit which is indicated by its articular construction which is anaphoric which means that the article is pointing back to the use of this word at the end of verse 2 indicating that it retains the same referent and meaning when it is used here in verse 3.

In 1 John 4:2, the noun theos appears twice and in both instances the word refers to the Holy Spirit and not the Father or the Son.

The articular construction of this word when it appears a second time in verse 2 indicates that it retains the same referent and meaning when it is used the first time in the verse.

The first time the noun theos occurs in 1 John 4:2, it is functioning as an epexegetical genitive which means that this word refers to the “same thing” as the substantive to which it is related, which is pneuma, “the Spirit.”

The genitive of apposition typically states a specific example that is a part of the larger category named by the head noun and is frequently used when the head noun is ambiguous or metaphorical.

Here the genitive form of the noun theos stands in apposition to the articular accusative form of the noun pneuma.

The latter is ambiguous in the sense that the reader is cannot be sure if John is speaking of the Father or the Spirit and also needs clarifying since he uses the word in 1 John 4:1 with regards to false doctrine which is taught by false prophets.

Therefore, this type of genitive indicates John is identifying the Spirit as being God.

Consequently, the word is affirming the deity of the Spirit.

Therefore, we can see that this epexegetical use of the noun theos when it is used for the first time in 1 John 4:2 indicates that the referent of the articular construction of this word later in this verse and in 1 John 4:3-4 and 6 is the Holy Spirit and not the Father or the Son.

As we noted the articular construction of the word the second time the word occurs in 1 John 4:2 and then in 1 John 4:3-4 and 6 is anaphoric meaning it is pointing back to the previous usage of the word indicating the word is retaining the same meaning and referent.

Therefore, the articular construction of this word in each instance indicates that the Holy Spirit is the referent of this word all the way back to epexegetical use of this word the first time it appears in 1 John 4:2.

Further indicating that the referent of theos is the Holy Spirit in each of these instances is that 1 John 4:2-6 presents a contrast between the Holy Spirit and the spirits which come from Satan’s kingdom.

In fact, in 1 John 4:6, the apostle John asserts that those people who obey the teaching of John and the recipients of First John possess the characteristic which originates from God and those who don’t are not from God.

Then, he asserts that by means of this obedience or disobedience, the recipients of First John can confirm the teaching of the Spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit.

Therefore, in 1 John 4:2-6, John is instructing the recipients of First John as to how they can confirm if a particular teaching originates from God the Holy Spirit or from Satan.

The truth originates from the former and deceit and falsehood from the latter.

However, we must remember that if the believer knows God the Holy Spirit experientially or in other words, is experiencing fellowship with Him, they are also experiencing fellowship with both the Father and the Son as well.

Therefore, since the noun theos in the first assertion refers to the Holy Spirit, it is referring again to the Spirit in the second assertion because its articular construction is again anaphoric.

This means that the article it pointing back to the use of the word earlier in verse 6 indicating it is retaining the same meaning and referent when it is used here a second time in the verse.

In the third assertion, the noun theos also refers to the Holy Spirit which is again indicated by the word’s articular construction which is anaphoric.

This means that the article is pointing back to the used of this word in the previous assertion indicating it is retaining the same meaning and referent here in the third assertion as it did in the second.