Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

8

I agree with much of what Jon Ericson has said but I think we can get even closer to the meaning of the "sin that leads to death" from the context of 1st John. John is dealing with a division that has occurred in his church (1 John 2:18-19). Some have left, denying that Jesus' had a physical body (1 John 4:1-3). The young men of the congregation ...


4

According to 2 John 7, there was the widespread belief that Jesus had only "appeared" and therefore did not come in the flesh -- so-called incipient Gnosticism. 2 John 1:7 (NASB) For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist. So in the epistle ...


3

From the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia's article on Gnosticism, comes the following, which I've highlighted and modified here and there: In the First Epistle of John there is a distinct polemical purpose. There is no book of the New Testament which is more purposeful in its attack of error. There is "the spirit of error" (1 John 4:6), opposing ...


3

At first glance it does seem odd that John would leave this command dangling on the end of his letter. Why would he suddenly mention idols and not say anything more on the subject when he hasn't spoken about idols at all his letter. One explanation is that John had more to say about idol worship but his letter as it now stands is unfinished. But this ...


3

Forgive me for quoting extensively from The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament. It's the only book I've found in more than 15 years of studying the writings of John which so clearly gets the water and blood right. The Standard View: Water and Blood as Baptism and Death It is tempting to suppose that the reference to water in ...


2

Since he is using the 'I' without further reference, he is the author. (No one else is being named explicitly who could be co-author.) The 'we' in the beginning therefore can only be understood as standing for the group of witnessing disciples (apostles). Regarding witness the commonness (plural) of the experience is important (as not being just an ...


2

I believe this verse has nothing to do with the security of the believer. It has been misunderstood and misapplied for too long. John was simply referring to the problem of false teachers that went out from the Jerusalem church that Luke had documented (see Acts 15:24). They were antichrists (2:18), had denied the Father and the Son (2:22), and were trying ...


2

As Joseph noted, is it certainly that something like a proto-Gnosticism in view, although recent scholarship has pushed back the dates of Gnosticism considerably later than was earlier assumed. Still, ideas start somewhere, and we seem to be seeing evidence in 1 John of at least a sort of incipient Gnosticism sufficient to deny the full reality of the ...


2

John 1:12 ὅσοι δὲ ἔλαβον αὐτόν ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν τέκνα θεοῦ γενέσθαι τοῖς πιστεύουσιν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ But as many as received him, to those who believe in his name, he gave them power to become sons of God, Thayer1 describes the sense of ἐξουσίαν (exousian) in this verse as "physical and mental power; the ability or strength with which one ...


1

Regarding the translation of these words in John 20 and 1Peter 3: Neither may nor might is intended or given in the Greek. The Apostles are trusting, not writing laissez-faire. RE: John 20:31 The writing down (from the author´s perspective) just had happened, whereas our (the readers´) trusting and therefore our living was (and is) yet to come. The simple ...


1

The 'we' here may be reference to the congregation who are being addressed by their absent Pastor. It could also be an address to disciples widely scattered. John feels that the things he declares demand the strongest evidence. He has not believed them lightly, and he does not expect others to believe them lightly.



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible