The Unction and Anointing
The Unction and Anointing
I.Watch and Test
In the light of the deceptions of the last hour (2:18–23).
2:18. John’s general warning against the world is now followed by a warning against one of its end-time manifestations. The false teachers who were present were worldly to the core (cf. 4:5). The readers knew about the predicted advent of the Antichrist and needed to be alerted to the appearance of many who would display his traits of hostility toward God’s Christ. This is a clear indication that history has entered a climactic era: the last hour. Despite the lapse of centuries since John wrote, the climax of all things impends in a special way. The stage has been set for history’s final drama.
2:19. Of the false teachers John had in mind, he wrote, They went out from us. The word “us” here is most naturally taken as the apostolic first person plural of this epistle (see 1:1–5; 4:6). “Us” contrasts with the “you” in 2:20–21, which referred to the readers. It does not make sense that the false teachers had left the churches to which the readers belonged. If they had, how were they still a problem? On the other hand if, like the legalists of Acts 15, they had seceded from the apostolic churches of Jerusalem and Judea, then they were a particular threat to the readers because they came to them claiming roots in the soil out of which Christianity arose. Thus John was eager to deny any connection with them.
They did not really belong to us paraphrases an expression more literally rendered, “they were not of us.” The writer’s point was that these men did not really share the spirit and perspective of the apostolic circle, for if they had their secession would not have taken place. Heresy in the Christian church, whether on the part of its saved members or unsaved people in it, always unmasks a fundamental disharmony with the spirit and doctrine of the apostles. A man in touch with God will submit to apostolic instruction (cf. 1 John 4:6).
2:20–21. The readers were well fortified against the antichrists, however, since they had an anointing from the Holy One (i.e., from God). The “anointing” is no doubt the Holy Spirit since, according to verse 27, the anointing “teaches.” This clearly suggests that the “anointing” is conceived of as a Person. Jesus Himself was “anointed” with the Holy Spirit (cf. Acts 10:38). (For the possibility that the term suggests that the church leaders are in view, see the Introduction.) As a result of their “anointing,” the readers (perhaps primarily the church leaders) had adequate instruction in the truth of God. John wrote them precisely because their apprehension of the truth was correct and because … the truth should never be confused with a lie.
2:22–23. The antichrists are liars for they deny that Jesus is the Christ, that is, God’s Son and the appointed Savior (cf. John 4:29, 42; 20:31). This denial involves also a denial of the Father. Any claim they might make to having the Father’s approval is false. One cannot have the Father without the Son. To reject One is to reject the Other.
D. In light of the readers’ responsibilities to abide (2:24–27).
2:24. The readers must see that what they have heard from the beginning (cf. 1:1; 2:7; 3:11) remains in them. If it does (NIV paraphrases here), they will remain in the Son and in the Father. The term translated “remain” is again menō, which the NIV renders as “live” and “lives” in 2:6, 10, 14, 17. John’s point was that if the readers would resist the lies of the antichrists and let the truth they had heard from the beginning “abide” (or “be at home”) in them, they would continue to “abide” in the fellowship of God the Father and God the Son.
2:25–26. They could also continue to rest on the divine promise of eternal life. As John later insisted (5:9–13; cf. 5:20), they could be sure that they possessed this on the basis of God’s testimony to that fact. It may well be that the antichrists denied that the readers were actually saved, since John went right on to say, I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray (cf. 3:7). Coming as they evidently did from the apostolic churches of Judea, these men apparently sought to undermine the readers’ conviction that Jesus is the Christ and that they had eternal life through Him. John’s insistence that his readers genuinely know God and know His truth (2:12–14, 21) was part of his strategy for fortifying them against the antichrists.
2:27. The readers did not need teaching from the antichrists or, for that matter, from anyone. Their anointing … received from God, remains in them and was a sufficient Teacher. This, along with verses 12–14, may imply that John’s readers were relatively spiritually mature, since the immature need human teachers (cf. Heb. 5:12). This is appropriate if John were addressing church leaders, but it would also suit a congregation that had long been in the faith. Unlike the antichrists, who may have claimed some form of inspiration, the readers’ anointing was real, not counterfeit. They needed to remain (menete, “abide”) in Him (the pronoun can refer to the anointing) and rely fully on His continuing instruction.
IV. The Body of the Epistle (2:28–4:19)
In the section just completed (2:12–27), John wrote both to assure his readers of the validity of their spiritual experiences and to warn them against the antichrists who denied that validity. In what may be described as the body of his letter, John then explored the true character and consequences of that form of experience which the readers already had and needed to maintain.
A. The theme stated (2:28).
2:28. Many commentators see a major break here. The words continue in Him involve again the Greek verb menō (“abide”) which has already occurred 10 times in verses 6–27. (John used menō 66 of the 112 times it occurs in the NT: 40 in John, 23 in 1 John, and 3 in 2 John.) In accord with his basic theme about fellowship (1 John 1:3), John once more enjoined the “abiding” life. But now he introduced the new thought of being confident before Christ at His coming. The Greek words rendered “be confident” are literally “have confidence.” The latter is parrēsia, a word that can signify a bold freedom of speech. John used it again in 3:21; 4:17; 5:14. If the readers would maintain their fellowship with God, they would enjoy a genuine boldness of speech when they would meet their Lord. How this can be so is the subject of 2:29–4:19. Should a believer fail to abide in Him, however, there is the possibility of shame when Christ comes. This intimates divine disapproval at the judgment seat of Christ, referred to in 4:17–19. The NIV‘s unashamed before Him might be more literally rendered: “not be ashamed before Him.” The possibility is real but does not, of course, suggest the loss of salvation.
B. Discerning the children of God (2:29–3:10a)
At this point John began to develop a line of thought which culminates in the acquisition of the boldness of which he had just spoken (2:28; cf. 4:17–19). The fellowship with the apostolic circle and with God which he had in mind (cf. 1:3) requires discerning the way the lives of God’s children are manifested in their actions. John was moving toward the thought that when one’s life is properly manifested, God Himself is manifested in it (4:12–16).
2:29. This verse introduces for the first time in 1 John the explicit thought of new birth. Since the readers know that He (God the Father or God the Son) is righteous, they would also know that everyone who does what is right has been born of Him (the pronoun here probably refers to God the Father who regenerates). (The phrase “born of God” occurs in 3:9; 4:7; 5:1, 4, 18 [twice].) The statement has nothing to do with the readers’ individual assurance of salvation. It is rather an assertion that when they see real righteousness (“what is right” translates tēn dikaiosynēn) exhibited, they can be sure that the person who exhibits it is a child of God. This righteousness, of course, for John can only mean the kind that Christ had enjoined. It has nothing to do with mere humanistic kindness and morality. The converse of John’s statement does not follow, namely, that everyone who is born of God does righteousness. John knew that Christians can walk in the darkness and are susceptible to sin (1:6, 8; 2:1). He was writing here of the way one can see the new birth in the actions of others.
3:1. This verse begins with the word idete (“behold, look at”), not translated in the NIV. The writer had just told the readers how to see the reality of new birth in righteous behavior; now he invited them to contemplate the greatness of the divine love which that reality displays. Behold how great is the love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God. (The words and that is what we are, rightly omitted by most mss., are probably a scribal addition.) In the Bible the word “called” indicates that this is what one actually is (cf. “called to be holy,” lit., “called saints” [1 Cor. 1:2]). Believers are “called children of God” because they are the born-ones (tekna) of “the Father.”
The perception to which John invited his readers is, however, lost on the world. Since the world … did not know Him (God or Christ), it can hardly be expected to recognize believers as His children. This kind of discernment about others is a distinctively Christian perception.
3:2–3. But even for Christians, this perception is a spiritual one. Though now we are children of God, there is no physical evidence of this that an eye can see. The physical changes in Christians await the coming of Christ. But we know that when He appears, we shall be like Him (cf. 1 Cor. 15:52–54; Phil. 3:21). Such a transformation will result from seeing Him as He is. But pending that event it is already true that everyone who has this hope in Him (the pronoun probably refers to Christ, the Object of this hope) purifies himself, just as He is pure. Here the writer probably continued to refer to the new birth. One who sets his hope by faith on the Son of God experiences an inward purification that is as complete as Christ’s own purity (“just as He is pure”). John thus prepared the ground for the assertions he would soon make (1 John 3:6, 9). New birth involves a perfect purification from sin.
3:4. John now wrote about sin which stands in opposition to the purity he had just referred to in verse 3. The NIV renders his statement: Everyone who sins breaks the law (tēn anomian poiei, “does lawlessness”); in fact, sin is lawlessness (anomia). Usually in the Greek New Testament anomia is a general term like the English word “wickedness,” which has some prominence in eschatological contexts (cf. Matt. 7:23; 13:41; 24:12; 2 Thes. 2:7). So its use here so soon after the references to the antichrists may be significant. The writer probably intended it to be a strongly pejorative description of sin. It seems likely, in view of 1 John 3:7, that the antichrists had a softened view of sin which John wished to refute. A person who sins does what is wicked, and sin is wickedness, John was insisting. (Lit., the first clause in v. 4 is, “Everyone who commits wickedness.”) Sin must not be taken lightly.
3:5–6. The seriousness of sin is further underscored by the consideration that Christ appeared so that He might take away our sins. And in Him is no sin. The Incarnation brought into the world the One who is totally sinless and who had as an objective the removal of sin from the lives of His own (cf. John 1:29; Heb. 9:28a). It follows logically from this that a person who is (“abides”) in a sinless Person must himself be sinless, for he has a sinless, regenerate nature.
This is the inescapable logic of the text. But a different point is suggested by the NIV‘s rendering: No one who lives (menōn, “abides”) in Him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen Him or known Him. A widely held explanation of this verse is that a believer “does not sin habitually,” that is, sin is not his way of life. However, the Greek text has no words to represent phrases such as “keeps on” or “continues to” or “habitually.” These phrases are based on an understanding of the Greek present tense which is now widely in dispute among New Testament scholars (see, e.g., S. Kubo, “1 John 3, 9: Absolute or Habitual?” Andrews University Seminary Studies 7. 1969:47–56; C.H. Dodd, The Johannine Epistles, pp. 78–81; I. Howard Marshall, The Epistles of John, p. 180). It cannot be shown anywhere in the New Testament that the present tense can bear this kind of meaning without the assistance of other words. Such a view is invalid for this verse and also for 1 John 3:9. Nor is John saying that sinless perfection must be achieved, and that those who fail to do so lose their salvation. Such a notion is foreign to John’s argument and to all of Scripture.
John’s point is simple and straight-forward. Sin is a product of ignorance and blindness toward God. “No one who sins has seen Him or known Him” (v. 6b).
Sin can never come out of seeing and knowing God. It can never be a part of the experience of abiding in Christ. “No one who abides in Him sins” (v. 6a). But though the meaning of this is not really open to question, there has seemed to be an inconsistency between such assertions and John’s earlier insistence that a believer can never claim to be without sin (1:8). The solution to this problem has been suggested by the statement in 3:3 in which the purification of the one “who has this hope in Him” is comparable in its nature to the purity of Christ (“just as He is pure”). From this it follows that the regenerate life is, in one sense, an essentially and fundamentally sinless life. For the believer sin is abnormal and unnatural; his whole bent of life is away from sin.
The fact remains, however, that Christians do not experience the sinless life perfectly on this earth; hence 1:8, 10 remain true. The two ideas are not really incompatible. The Christian still experiences a genuine struggle with the flesh and overcomes its impulses only by the help of the Holy Spirit (cf. Gal. 5:16–26).
Paul’s thinking also conforms with this view. In his struggle with sin he was able to conclude, “Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it” (Rom. 7:20). In this way Paul could perceive sin as not a real part of what he was at the most inward level of his being (cf. Rom. 7:25). When he wrote, “I no longer live, but Christ lives in me” (Gal. 2:20), he implied the same thing. If Christ alone really lives, sin can be no part of that experience. Insofar as God is experienced by a believer, that experience is sinless. (Cf. comments on 1 John 3:9.)
3:7–8. These verses suggest strongly that the doctrine of the antichrists involved a confusion between sin and righteousness. Perhaps the antichrists felt free to sin while at the same time denying their guilt and claiming to behave righteously. John warned against such ideas: Do not let anyone lead you astray. (The Gr. verb “lead astray,” planaō, used also in 2:26, is the same word rendered “deceive” in 1:8.) He who does what is right is righteous, just as He is righteous (cf. 1:9; 2:1, 29). Only righteousness springs from a righteous nature. By contrast, He who does what is sinful is of the devil. It would be wrong to water this assertion down. All sin, of whatever kind or degree, is satanic in nature. This is because the devil has been sinning from the beginning (cf. John 8:44). Sin originated with Satan and is his constant practice. To take part in sin at all is to take part in his activity. It is also opposing the work of the Son of God who came (appeared; cf. 1 John 3:5; Heb. 9:28a) to put an end (lysē, destroy) to that activity, the devil’s work. Even the smallest sin runs counter to the work of Christ. Believers are to overcome “the evil one” (1 John 2:13–14), here called “the devil,” and not to participate in what he is.
3:9. As was pointed out in connection with verse 6, adding such phrases as “continue to” and “go on” to John’s statements about sinning is not justified on the basis of the Greek text. As before, the statements are absolute. One who is born of God (cf. 2:29; 4:7; 5:1, 4, 18) does not sin precisely because God’s seed remains in him, and he cannot sin because he has been born of God. “God’s seed” is His nature, given to each believer at salvation (John 1:13; 2 Peter 1:4). The point here is that the child partakes of the nature of his Parent. The thought of a sinless Parent who begets a child who only sins a little is far from the author’s mind. As always, John dealt in stark contrasts. All sin is devilish (1 John 3:8); it does not stem from the believer’s regenerate nature, God’s seed, but the child of God cannot and does not sin. The explanation here is the same as that given in verse 6. The “new man” (or “new self”; Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10) is an absolutely perfect new creation. By insisting on this point, John was seeking to refute a false conception about sin. Sin is not, nor ever can be, anything but satanic. It can never spring from what a Christian truly is at the level of his regenerate being.
3:10a. Literally, the first phrase of this verse is, “By this are manifest the children of God and the children of the devil.” The words “by this” probably refer back to the whole previous discussion. By sharply differentiating between sin and righteousness, John made plain the fundamental way in which God’s children are manifest over against the children of the devil. The key to his idea is the word “manifest” in which the ideas presented in 2:29 and 3:1 are touched again. Because a child of God is sinless at the core of his being, he can never be “manifest” through sin as can a child of the devil. While an unsaved person can display his true nature through sin, a child of God cannot. When a Christian sins, he conceals who he really is rather than making it manifest. If the readers perceive someone doing real righteousness, then—but only then—can they perceive this action as a true product of new birth (2:29) and can thus behold God’s love (3:1). This consideration is crucial to John’s advancing argument.
C. Discerning love for the brethren (3:10b–23)
John now left behind the subject of new birth which he did not mention again until 4:7. The function of the section that begins here is to define righteousness primarily in terms of Christian brotherly love and to show how such love properly expresses itself.