1 John 4:3

4:1-6 Christians who are well acquainted with the Scriptures, may, in humble dependence on Divine teaching, discern those who set forth doctrines according to the apostles, and those who contradict them. The sum of revealed religion is in the doctrine concerning Christ, his person and office. The false teachers spake of the world according to its maxims and tastes, so as not to offend carnal men. The world approved them, they made rapid progress, and had many followers such as themselves; the world will love its own, and its own will love it. The true doctrine as to the Saviour's person, as leading men from the world to God, is a mark of the spirit of truth in opposition to the spirit of error. The more pure and holy any doctrine is, the more likely to be of God; nor can we by any other rules try the spirits whether they are of God or not. And what wonder is it, that people of a worldly spirit should cleave to those who are like themselves, and suit their schemes and discourses to their corrupt taste?

1 John 4:3 . The Test negatively expressed. Omit Χριστὸν ἐν σαρκὶ ἐληλυθότα . τὸν Ἰησοῦν , “the aforementioned Jesus,” “jesus as thus described”. μή makes the statement hypothetical: “every spirit, if such there be, which doth not confess”. The variant λύει τὸν Ἰησοῦν , solvit Jesum (Vulg., Aug.), “dissolveth” or “severeth Jesus,” i.e. , separates the divinity and the humanity, aptly defines the Cerinthian heresy. It was much appealed to in later days against Nestorius. The ecclesiastical historian Socrates (see crit. note) says it was the primitive reading, and was altered by “those who wished to separate the deity from the man of the Incarnation”. St. Augustine, defining heresy as schism due to lack of brotherly love, comments: “Ille venit colligere, tu venis solvere. Distringere vis membra Christi. Quomodo non negas Christum in carne venisse, qui disrumpis Ecclesiam Dei, quam ille congregavit? “On the Antichrist see note on 1 John 2:18 . ὃ ἀκηκόατε ὅτι ἔρχεται , “which ye have heard that it is coming”—the regular Greek idiom. Cf. Luke 4:34 : οἶδά σε τίς εἶ .

But on the contrary, concerning them who against so plain evidence denied him to be so come, the case was plain; as with the Jews, John 8:24 , and with the present heretics, who denying the true manner, could not but deny the true end of his coming; and who also lived so impure lives as imported the most open opposition and hostility thereto, and so discovered must evidently that antichristian spirit, which it was foreknown would show itself in the world.

1 John 4:3 . Every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh — That doth not acknowledge him to be the true Messiah, as above observed, and that he came in that particular manner, though he might have come otherwise; is not of Gods — “To determine whether the Socinian interpretation of the clause, hath come in the flesh, expresses the apostle’s meaning, let that interpretation be substituted for the expression of which it is the interpretation, and the passages under consideration will run thus: 1 John 4:2 , Every spirit, every teacher, calling himself inspired, who confesseth Jesus Christ hath come a mere man, is from God; 1 John 4:3 , And every spirit who doth not confess Jesus Christ hath come a mere man, is not from God. Wherefore, as St. John is here giving marks by which true and false teachers were to be distinguished, if the Socinian sense of the phrase, hath come in the flesh, be just, he hath made it the mark of a true teacher, that he confesseth Jesus Christ as a mere man; and the mark of a false teacher, that he doth not confess Jesus Christ as a mere man, but affirmeth that he is more than a mere man; consequently, by so doing, St.

John has condemned himself as a false teacher; because, having declared ( 1 John 4:15 ; 1 John 5:5 ) that Jesus Christ is the Song of Solomon of God, he hath confessed that he is more than a mere man.” And also in his gospel, having told us, ( John 1:14 ,) that the Word (who he had said, 1 John 4:1 , was with God and was God ) was made flesh and dwelt among us, and they beheld his glory, the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father, “he hath certainly confessed that Jesus Christ is more than a mere man: for whose glory did the apostles behold, if it was not the glory of the Word made flesh, the only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth? Wherefore, John having confessed that Jesus is the only-begotten Son of God, he cannot be supposed to have branded those teachers as deceivers, who did not confess Jesus Christ to be a mere man, but affirmed him to be more than a man; because, by so doing, he would have condemned himself as a false teacher.” And this is that spirit of antichrist which ye have heard, &c. — “From this, as well as from John 2:18 , it appears that antichrist is not any particular person, nor any particular succession of persons in the church, but a general name for all false teachers in every age, who disseminate doctrines contrary to those taught by the apostles; especially if these doctrines have a tendency to derogate from Christ’s character and actions as the Saviour of the world.” — Macknight.

Is come in the flesh Omit. Render, confesseth not Jesus. So Rev. An ancient reading is λύει τὸν Ἱησοῦν annulleth or destroyeth Jesus." The simple Jesus emphasizes the humanity of our Lord considered in itself. See Romans 3:26; Romans 10:9; 2 Corinthians 11:4; Ephesians 4:21; Hebrews 2:9. This (τοῦτο) Not this spirit, but this non-confession, summed up in all its manifestations. Cometh See on 1 John 2:18.

Verse 3. - Every spirit (not so much the personal teacher as the principle or tendency of the doctrine) which confesseth not Jesus. This is the true reading, the words Ξριστὸν ἐν σαρκὶ ἐληλυθότα being a spurious addition from verse 1. As so often, St. John states the case both negatively and positively for emphasis. There is an ancient variant reading of much interest, probably of Latin origin, which can be traced back to the second century, being known to Tertullian and Iranaeus. For μὴ ὁμολογεῖ τὸν Ἰησοῦν it gives λύει τὸν Ἰησοῦν , solvit Jesum. This corruption of the text was evidently aimed at those who distinguished the man Jesus from the Divine Christ, and thus "dissolved" his Personality. The Greek manuscripts are quite unanimous against the reading. Is not of God; and therefore is of the evil one (see on 1 John 3:10). These professedly Christian teachers are ever among the most dangerous who treat the Divinity of Jesus Christ as more or less of an open question, or as a matter of indifference. Τὸ τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου probably means "the spirit of antichrist," understanding πνεῦμα from the preceding clause rather than (quite vaguely) "the characteristic of antichrist" (see on 1 John 2:18, to which passage, however, ἀκηκόατε does not refer, (but to Christian teaching in general). And now it is in the world already. This is an independent statement; St. John does not say that they had heard this previously. 1 John 4:3

3. confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh—Irenæus [3.8], Lucifer, Origen, on Mt 25:14, and Vulgate read, "Every spirit which destroys (sets aside, or does away with) Jesus (Christ)." Cyprian and Polycarp support English Version text. The oldest extant manuscripts, which are, however, centuries after Polycarp, read, "Every spirit that confesseth not (that is, refuses to confess) Jesus" (in His person, and all His offices and divinity), omitting "is come in the flesh." ye have heard—from your Christian teachers. already is it in the world—in the person of the false prophets (1Jo 4:1).

And every spirit that confesseth not ... - That is, this doctrine is essential to the Christian system; and he who does not hold it cannot be regarded either as a Christian, or recognised as a Christian teacher. If he was not a man, then all that occurred in his life, in Gethsemane, and on the cross, was in "appearance" only, and was assumed only to delude the senses. There were no real sufferings; there was no shedding of blood; there was no death on the cross; and, of course, there was no atonement. A mere show, an appearance assumed, a vision, could not make atonement for sin; and a denial, therefore, of the doctrine that the Son of God had come in the flesh, was in fact a denial of the doctrine of expiation for sin. The Latin Vulgate here reads "qui solvit Jesum," "who dissolves or divides Jesus;" and Socrates (H. E. vii. 32) says that in the old copies of the New Testament it is written ὅ λίει τὸν Ἱησοῦν ho liei ton Hiēsoun, "who dissolves or divides Jesus;" that is, who "separates" his true nature or person, or who supposes that there were "two" Christs, one in appearance, and one in reality. This reading was early found in some manuscripts, and is referred to by many of the Fathers, (see Wetstein,) but it has no real authority, and was evidently introduced, perhaps at first from a marginal note, to oppose the prevailing errors of the times.

The common reading, "who confesseth not," is found in all the Greek manuscripts, in the Syriac versions, in the Arabic; and, as Lucke says, the other reading is manifestly of Latin origin. The common reading in the text is that which is sustained by authority, and is entirely in accordance with the manner of John. And this is that spirit of antichrist - This is one of the things which characterize antichrist. John here refers not to an individual who should be known as antichrist, but to a class of persons. This does not, however, forbid the idea that there might be some one individual, or a succession of persons in the church, to whom the name might be applied by way of eminence. See the notes at 1 John 2:18. Compare the notes at 2 Thessalonians 2:3 ff. Whereof ye have heard that it should come - See the notes at 1 John 2:18.