99

ple of God's children, cfr. Gosp. St. John iii. 6, sqq. Yet, clearly σπέρμα has a reference to γεννηθῆναι ἐκ TO Dɛou, and must be considered as an amplification of this figurative expression; it is the divine power, by which the children of God are, as it were, generated, and, by this word, St. John expresses either the innate godly principle in man, ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ εἶναι, in sensu latiori; or, since he is here speaking of regeneration and the filial relation to God through Christ, he denotes by it the vεũμa äyιov, by which man is born anew of God, cfr. Gospel iii. 6, sqq. through which he, as St. Paul says, calls God Father, in short, the πνεῦμα υἱοθεσίας.9 The Scholion in Matthäi says, very correctly, that here is meant ro πνευματικὸν χάρισμα, ὃ μένον ἐν ἡμῖν ἀνεπίδεκτον ἁμαρτίας τὸν νοῦν ποιεῖ. As St. John takes the birth of God, and the filial relation to God, in its fullest and most ideal sense, the sentiment contained in ver. 9 is easily understood. If man is, quite and entirely, and in the most perfect manner, born again of God, the divine σπέρμα οι πνεῦμα must necessarily remain in him. Every diminution, every loss of this seed, is a proof that the birth of God was not perfect. St. John, however, far from wishing to instil the doctrine of the irresistibility of the divine grace, says no more

99 Lange takes riqua in the same sense as the Hebrew 7, giving to it the signification of offspring; he refers both aurOÜ and iv air to God, and translates thus: " for his (God's) children remain in him, (continue faithful to him.") But the parallel conclusion of the proposition, as well as the whole context of the figure and the ideas, is adverse to this.

than this: that in God, and in godly life, absolutely considered, there is nothing imperfect, nothing weak, no half-and-half of light and darkness. Neither is there any difficulty in the last proposition of the verse, καὶ οὐ δύναται άμαρτ., we only must bear in mind, that St. John's point of view here is, that of the ideal and absolute divine κρίσις. In such a context as that of our passage, it is literally true, that as little as sin and evil can be imagined in God, as little can he, who is really born of God, as long as he is, and continues such, commit sin, in that sense of the word which was laid down in verse 8.100 Οὐ dúvara must, accordingly, not be softened or modified by the substitution of any other notion implying ou 9, but it is to be taken quite strictly, and, of course, in a moral sense.101 "Or, likewise, here in both places, St. John uses in the acceptation of because, cfr. verse 14. What St. Jerome observes against Jovian, and Calovius approves, that or here is equivalent to quamdiu, quatenus, quousque, very much tends to

Jo

100 Jovianus seems to have understood our passage in the same manner, when, taking it and v. 18 for his warrant, and, following Jerome, he maintained: eos, qui plena fide in baptismate renati sunt, a diabolo non posse subverti. Quicunque tentati fuerint, ostendi eos aqua tantum et non spiritu baptizatos. vianus had adopted an ideal point of view, similar to that of St. John, and the principal object of his reforming moral-critical endeavours, which were directed against the hypocrisy, outside fairness and lookwarmness of Christian life in his age, was to re-establish the fundamental principles and ideals of the gospel in their full clearness, precision and truth.

101 Ecumenius says: Οὐ κατὰ φυσικὴν ἀδυναμίαν τοῦτο λέγει, ἀλλὰ κατὰ προαιρετικὴν τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἀργίαν.

render the idea more perspicuous from another point of view than that of St. John.

The paraenetic import of ver. 7-9, seems to be this: As betwixt the true life which is of God, according to this pattern given by Christ: and the devil's servitude: there can exist for man no third or intermediate thing, and moral man, accordingly, in ideal respect, must either entirely belong to God, or entirely to the devil:-the motive for abandoning all moral half-measures and irresolution is very urgent. He, then, who has rightly appreciated the character, the force and the power of God's children, and well considered what, as a child of God, he ought to do, and what, by means of the divine seed which he has received, he can do, will the more decidedly renounce the world, and endeavour to acquire the divine ȧyvóτης and δικαιοσύνη, as it was in Christ, since he only by that means can participate in the communion with God, and in the glory of God's children, (ver. 2, 3.)

Because the world neither knows nor appreciates the difference between God's children and those who are not God's children, St. John adds, with great emphasis, in ver. 10, ̓Εν τούτῳ φανερά ἐστι τὰ τέκνα τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τὰ τέκνα τοῦ διαβόλου. This distinction is manifest only in the light of the divine zgíois. The uncritical world confounds and mingles together good and evil, God and devil. As to the Hebrew phrase Texva ToŨ diaßóλou-cfr. John viii. 44, it expresses a mere ethical relation,102

102 Schöttgen. Hor. Hebr. on this passage.

SECTION SIXTH.

CHAPTER II. 10-24.

THE Christian dinamorón shews itself, above all things, in the Christian brotherly-love, cfr. Gal. v. 14; Col. iii. 14. As the former is genuine only when it is of the same essence and root with Christ's dizanoúvn, so the Christian brotherly-love is genuine, and perfect, and participant in eternal life, only when resembling Christ's love.

And, as all lack of righteousness, and all sinning is of the devil, so likewise all lack of brotherly-love, and all hatred is of the devil-it essentially resembles the fratricide of Cain, and is the death of the soul, ver. 10—18.

The construction of ver. 10 is best unravelled by repeating οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ after ὁ μὴ ἀγαπῶν τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ. St. John's meaning is: as far as he who is not righteous, is from being a child of God, as far is he too (nai) who does not love his brother.

The concatenation of ver. 10 and 11, as well as also the internal connection of ver. 11 and 12, is to be taken thus: He who does not love the brethren, is indeed far from being of God, since (ör), that which always forms the commencement of the announcement of the gospel, is the commandment, that we shall mutually love one another, and not be as diabolically minded as Cain, who was of the devil, and murdered his brother, &c.

Instead of the common reading ȧyyɛñía, which is

found in the greatest number of copies, and also in the best, there are some who read103 Tayyɛλíα. If the more difficult reading ayyλíɑ were, however, the right one, it would seem to have been here put instead of ayyeλía, and, joined to iva, it would be equivalent to vroλ), an announcement that ("va) something is to be done, a command. In the language of the New Testament, this word indeed, does not in any other place occur, being used in the same sense, but it certainly occurs in the classics. 104 'Ayyλía combined with iva, would also be equivalent with evro. The commandment we find in St. John's gospel xiii. 34.

The elliptical expression ver. 12, où nadwg Káïv is completed in many different ways. In every case that which is to be supplied, must be considered as dependent on "va. Some authors supply ἀγαπῶμεν after ou others Toμεv, or some such word. But, in the former case, an irony unsuited to this context is produced; but in both cases a second complement of ös after Káï is rendered indispensable, which, since the omission of the relative pronoun never occurs either in classical Greek or in that of the New Testament, it would be difficult to justify. It is much more simple and natural to adopt the complement of Grotius, οὐκ ὦμεν ἐκ τοῦ πονηρᾶ, καθὼς Κάϊν

103 Code C is one of these.

104 Thus in Polyb. IX. 38. 2. irayysλía denotes demand, cfr. VI. 13. 6. See Reiske Index Graecitatis Demosth. p. 329, 30, where of the verb is stated that it denotes denuntiare, sive indicando rem factam, sive imperando faciendam. Cfr. Schneider's Dictionary sub voce.