Is Jesus called GOD at 1 John 5:20, By George Vance Smith 1892
1 John v. 20.—Here we read:—"And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we know him that is true; and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life." It would here certainly appear as if Jesus Christ were termed the true God. But, on the other hand, it seems plain that the writer is referring to two objects. One is, "him that is true;" there can be no question that by this phrase God is meant. The second object is in the words "in his Son;" that is, we are in (1) God through and in (2) Jesus Christ. But then come the words, "This is the true God," as if the writer meant to reduce the two objects spoken of to one. But such a meaning would be self-contradictory, and cannot be what is intended. Dr. Liddon, however, has no hesitation about it. The Apostle, he tells us, "leads us up to the culminating statement that Jesus himself is the true God and eternal life" (p. 239). He adds in a note, "After having distinguished the ALHQINOS [true] from his hUIOS [Son], St. John, by a characteristic turn, simply identifies the Son with the ALHQINOS QEOS." With all due deference to Dr. Liddon, it is not to be thought that the Apostle wrote such nonsense as this. The whole difficulty is at once removed by referring the word "this," not to Jesus Christ, but to the previous object denoted by the words, "him that is true." This yields an easy and self-consistent sense. By being in Jesus Christ, we are in Him that is true; this is the true God and eternal life.
There is another instance in the Epistles attributed to John in which "this" is similarly used—referred, that is, not to the nearer, but to a more remote, antecedent. In 2 John 7 (R. V.) we read: "Many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even they that confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh: this is the deceiver and the antichrist." Here, in strictness, "this" refers to Jesus Christ. But this cannot be the meaning. It is clear that the author of these Epistles writes with a certain carelessness or inaccuracy; but it does not follow that he writes nonsense. It is perfectly reasonable, then, in the former of the two expressions, to conclude that the word "this" must be referred to the more distant antecedent. If, in short, the writer does not intend to say, in the one case, that Jesus Christ is a deceiver, neither can he intend us to understand, in the other, that he terms him "the true God."
.................................
1 John v. 20.—Here we read:—"And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we know him that is true; and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life." It would here certainly appear as if Jesus Christ were termed the true God. But, on the other hand, it seems plain that the writer is referring to two objects. One is, "him that is true;" there can be no question that by this phrase God is meant. The second object is in the words "in his Son;" that is, we are in (1) God through and in (2) Jesus Christ. But then come the words, "This is the true God," as if the writer meant to reduce the two objects spoken of to one. But such a meaning would be self-contradictory, and cannot be what is intended. Dr. Liddon, however, has no hesitation about it. The Apostle, he tells us, "leads us up to the culminating statement that Jesus himself is the true God and eternal life" (p. 239). He adds in a note, "After having distinguished the ALHQINOS [true] from his hUIOS [Son], St. John, by a characteristic turn, simply identifies the Son with the ALHQINOS QEOS." With all due deference to Dr. Liddon, it is not to be thought that the Apostle wrote such nonsense as this. The whole difficulty is at once removed by referring the word "this," not to Jesus Christ, but to the previous object denoted by the words, "him that is true." This yields an easy and self-consistent sense. By being in Jesus Christ, we are in Him that is true; this is the true God and eternal life.
There is another instance in the Epistles attributed to John in which "this" is similarly used—referred, that is, not to the nearer, but to a more remote, antecedent. In 2 John 7 (R. V.) we read: "Many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even they that confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh: this is the deceiver and the antichrist." Here, in strictness, "this" refers to Jesus Christ. But this cannot be the meaning. It is clear that the author of these Epistles writes with a certain carelessness or inaccuracy; but it does not follow that he writes nonsense. It is perfectly reasonable, then, in the former of the two expressions, to conclude that the word "this" must be referred to the more distant antecedent. If, in short, the writer does not intend to say, in the one case, that Jesus Christ is a deceiver, neither can he intend us to understand, in the other, that he terms him "the true God."
.................................
Also:
The NIV Study Bible (also NASB Study Bible/Zondervan) says in a footnote,
"Him who is true. God the Father. He is the true God. Could refer to either God the Father or God the Son."
What do others say?
"it should be noted that precisely in St. John's First Epistle [O QEOS] ho theos, "the true God" so often certainly means the Father that it must be understood of the Father throughout the Epistle, unless we are to suppose that some incomprehensible change has taken place in the subject referred to by O QEOS." Theological Investigations, Vol. 1 by Karl Rahner,
Third printing: 1965, pages 136, 137. Compare John 17:3
"houtos: as a climax to vv.18-20 the ref[erence] is almost certainly to God the real, the true, opp[osite of] paganism(v.21.)"- "A Grammatical Analysis of the Greek New Testament,
Zerwick/Grosvenor, Rome Biblical Institue, 1981.
"[1 John 5:]20f. Christ has revealed the one true God, the source of eternal life (cf. 5:12; Jn 17:3, 20:31). 'This is the true God' does not refer to Jesus as Stauffer thinks(Theology of the
NT.(English translation 1955), 114)." G. Johnston, Peake's Commentary on the Bible, Thomas Nelson and Sons, reprint of 1964.
"Conclusion: Although it is certainly possible that houtos ["this one"] refers back to Jesus Christ, several converging lines of evidence points to "the true one," God the Father, as the
probable antecedent. This position, houtos = God, is held by many commentators, authors of general studies, and significantly, by those grammarians who express an opinion on the matter."-M. Harris, "Jesus as God, The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus," Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1992, p.253.
No comments:
Post a Comment