Tag Archives: 1 John 2:18-19

The Day of the Lord, Part 6

Posted on by

This is a continuation of my consideration whether my assumption that Jesus called Judas Iscariot ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας (NET: the one destined for destruction) is like Jesus’ disciples’ discussion about having no bread1 after He said: “Watch out! Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and the yeast of Herod!”2

In another essay I began to look at John’s description of antichrist and many antichrists because Meyer’s NT Commentary stated that many of the Church Fathers had understood Paul’s description of the man of lawlessness, the son of destruction, as the Antichrist.

2 Thessalonians 2:3b, 4 (NET)

The Church Fathers
For [the day of the Lord] will not arrive until the rebellion comes and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction (ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας) [Table]. He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, and as a result he takes his seat in God’s temple, displaying himself as God [Table]. They correctly agree in considering that by the advent (2 Thessalonians 2:1; 2 Thessalonians 2:8), or the day of the Lord (2 Thessalonians 2:2), is to be understood the personal advent of Christ for the last judgment and for the completion of the Messianic kingdom. Also it is correctly regarded as proved, that the Antichrist here described is to be considered as an individual person, in whom sin will embody itself.

The last insight into antichrist I considered in another essay I titled “the antichrist…denies the Father and the Son.” John penned a contrast to this title in the final verse I quoted under that heading: The person who confesses (ὁ ὁμολογῶν) the Son has the Father also.3 His explanation of this point is my final insight:

4. …the spirit of the antichrist…refuses to confess Jesus

John wrote (1 John 4:1-3; 2 John 1:7 NET):

Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to determine if they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses Jesus as the Christ who has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that refuses to confess Jesus, that spirit is not from God, and this is the spirit of the antichrist (ἀντιχρίστου), which you have heard is coming, and now is already in the world [Table].

For many deceivers have gone out4 into the world, people who do not confess Jesus as Christ coming in the flesh. This person is the deceiver and the antichrist!

Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to determine if they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.5 Though I might otherwise have focused on test (δοκιμάζετε, a form of δοκιμάζω) the spirits, this study has focused my attention on the many antichrists who went out from us.

1 John 2:18b, 19a (NET Parallel Greek) Table

1 John 4:1b (NET Parallel Greek)
καὶ νῦν ἀντίχριστοι πολλοὶ γεγόνασιν…ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐξῆλθαν ὅτι πολλοὶ ψευδοπροφῆται ἐξεληλύθασιν εἰς τὸν κόσμον

1 John 2:18b, 19a (NET)

1 John 4:1b (NET)
so now many antichrists have appeared…They went out from us because many false prophets have gone out into the world

This is, admittedly, the first time I’ve made any strong connection between ἀντίχριστοι πολλοὶ (many antichrists) and πολλοὶ ψευδοπροφῆται (many false prophets). The connection is made primarily by John’s descriptions of antichrist and many antichrists, but also through the verbs ἐξῆλθαν (They went out) and ἐξεληλύθασιν (have gone out), forms of ἐξέρχομαι. I hadn’t thought of these many false prophets as those who went out from us before. Jesus warned, Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.6

Up until this moment my religious mind had limited my understanding of false prophets to “religious” things, to those who make false predictions about Jesus’ return or some other false teaching of Scripture. Combined with the many antichrists who went out from us, Jesus’ warning that whoever does not gather with me scatters (σκορπίζει, a form of σκορπίζω) and my initial insights into false wonders, however, I’m willing to modify that understanding.

Charles Darwin doesn’t appear to be one who went out from the visible church literally. “Darwin and his family had a lifetime involvement with the Church of England, and various dissenting establishments…His local activities in the village of Down paint a fascinating picture of a man who, despite his own divergent beliefs and uncertainties, was determined to support the church as a social institution.”7 This was partly explained by the existence of a state church in England: “A nominal adherence to the Anglican Church’s teachings was still essential for admittance to many of the elite cultural and political institutions of England. It was required to enter Oxford and Cambridge, for example, and an Oxbridge degree was often crucial, in turn, in securing a position in the most prestigious professions. As a young man, Charles went up to Cambridge in 1828 with the aim of completing the necessary studies to be a clergyman.”8

On the other hand, it is apparent that Aleister Crowley went out from the Plymouth Brethren. An entry in Wikipedia describing “The Confessions of Aleister Crowley: An Autohagiography” states: “In reference to his early years of being raised by fundamentalist Christians, Crowley explains how he became a rebel against conventional religion and how his behaviour and conflicts with authority figures contributed to his reputation as a dark magician. Whilst Crowley does not deny dabbling with demonic forces, his memoirs reveal that his aim was the progress and spiritual freedom of humanity.”9

E.O. Wilson, the controversial10 “father of sociobiology,” according to an entry11 in Wikipedia online:

…described his position as “provisional deism”[71] and explicitly denied the label of “atheist”, preferring “agnostic”.[72] He explained his faith as a trajectory away from traditional beliefs: “I drifted away from the church, not definitively agnostic or atheistic, just Baptist & Christian no more.”[45] Wilson argued that belief in God and the rituals of religion are products of evolution.[73] He argued that they should not be rejected or dismissed, but further investigated by science to better understand their significance to human nature. In his book The Creation, Wilson wrote that scientists ought to “offer the hand of friendship” to religious leaders and build an alliance with them, stating that “Science and religion are two of the most potent forces on Earth and they should come together to save the creation.”[74]

…In a New Scientist interview published on January 21, 2015, however, Wilson said that “Religion ‘is dragging us down’ and must be eliminated ‘for the sake of human progress'”, and “So I would say that for the sake of human progress, the best thing we could possibly do would be to diminish, to the point of eliminating, religious faiths.”[76]

An entry titled “Sociobiology” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy online states:

Human behavioral ecology (HBE), or human evolutionary ecology, is the current evolutionary social science most closely related to Wilson’s sociobiological project; it is the project that is sometimes still referred to as “sociobiology” by some philosophers of science (Griffiths, 2008; Sterelny and Griffiths, 1999)…

To understand the purposes of the HBE project, let’s consider one of its classic examples: Kaplan and Hill’s (1992) work on prey choice strategies amongst the Ache foragers of Paraguay. Just as in non-human behavioral ecology, behavioral strategies in HBE are usually described as complex behavioral dispositions. Behavioral dispositions involve behavioral responses to local stimuli; behavioral strategies then involve producing a set of different responses to a set of different stimuli (i.e. the response conditions of the strategy). According to Kaplan and Hill, the Ache prey choice strategy involves choosing a variety of different potential prey items from the environment; whether or not a prey item is taken depends on a number of circumstances acting as the response conditions: for example, the presence of prey with certain specific features, such as the caloric return of the prey given the time necessary to process it (known as the profitability); the rate at which that prey occurs in the environment; whether or not the prey is encountered on their search; and the search time available on a foraging trip…

HBEs explicitly accept that social learning of general purpose reasoning may be responsible for human behavioral strategies such as the Ache’s.

This was followed immediately by a Human Behavioral Ecology “statement of faith”:

However, this is ultimately irrelevant; one way or another, natural selection has, in effect, “seen to it” that humans behave in ways that tend to maximize their reproductive success.

The Lord used statements like this in E.O. Wilson’s comments on Sociobiology to help wean me from any consideration of evolution as a plausible alternative to his creation of life. As for “means” (e.g., God used evolution to create life as we see it now), it’s not what the Scripture says. Perhaps, the benefit I’ve derived from considering each of these men as I followed Jesus through the Scriptures has made me slow (or even loathe) to recognize them as false prophets and antichrists. And that brings me at last to Friedrich Nietzsche.

According to an entry in Wikipedia online, Friedrich Nietzsche was the son of “a Lutheran pastor[15]…Academic records from one of the schools attended by Nietzsche noted that he excelled in Christian theology.”[17] The Lord used Nietzsche’s12 writings to help me understand my own unbelief. I wrote of Nietzsche in another essay:

When I consider the justice of God’s mercy in and through Christ I am reminded of Friedrich Nietzsche. Jesus said, Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul.[30] The soul cannot be killed with weaponry. But Friedrich Nietzsche came about as close to being a soul killer as I can imagine a human being becoming. Who can calculate his devastating impact on the souls of academics and the intelligentsia? But if I imagine him in torment in hell for all eternity, cursing his nonexistent god, I realize that I can imagine no greater destruction of the personality I know as Friedrich Nietzsche than to find him one day clothed and in his right mind,[31] and sitting at the feet of Jesus.

This particular blog entry posted: May 25, 2013. The confirmation of this “no greater destruction” insight posted: December 14, 2022. It was the first time I really grappled with the differences between the mind of Christ and my religious mind vis-a-vis John 12:31, 32 (NET).

Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be driven out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.

Before that study I could only see these as three independent projects on a to-do list. Afterward, I began to see the first two accomplished in the promise of the third. Present day scientists and philosophers would call that confirmation bias. Possibly so, but it’s the kind of confirmation bias that helps to keep me following Jesus through the Scripture.

Frankly, I would much rather tell you that I learned about the judgment of this world13 from Jesus’ words, explained in his promise, And I…will draw all people to myself,14 and then declared “that I can imagine no greater destruction of the personality I know as Friedrich Nietzsche than to find him one day clothed and in his right mind,[31] and sitting at the feet of Jesus.” The opposite, that I had this insight before I heard Jesus’ words (which I had read many times before), makes me feel stupid and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!15 And the prophet here was none other than the Lord Himself!

Granted, some of my stupidity and slowness of heart to believe is attributable to the fact that what I am believing now is contrary to my religion and even to my own religious mind. This confirmation bias is one of many that helps me to gain the courage to stand up to my religion and my own religious mind and say: “No, I would rather be wrong trusting Jesus’ words when I stand before Him in judgment, than right trusting yours.”

Having said that, I think it’s important to point out that John limited the terms antichrist, false prophets and deceivers (πλάνοι, a form of πλάνος) to those who do not confess Jesus as the Christ who has come in the flesh,16 to people who do not confess Jesus as Christ coming in the flesh.17 These are not terms John threw out at brothers and sisters who are slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken. The resurrected Jesus described us as, You foolish people (ὦ ἀνόητοι).18 The Greek word ἀνόητοι is a plural form of the adjective ἀνόητος: “uneducated, low intelligence, unintelligent, lacking understanding; unwise, not thought on, unheard of; foolish, senseless.”

I’ll continue with this in another essay. A table comparing 2 John 1:7 in the NET and KJV follows.

2 John 1:7 (NET)

2 John 1:7 (KJV)
For many deceivers have gone out into the world, people who do not confess Jesus as Christ coming in the flesh. This person is the deceiver and the antichrist! For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

2 John 1:7 (NET Parallel Greek)

2 John 1:7 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

2 John 1:7 (Byzantine Majority Text)
Ὅτι πολλοὶ πλάνοι ἐξῆλθον εἰς τὸν κόσμον, οἱ μὴ ὁμολογοῦντες Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐρχόμενον ἐν σαρκί· οὗτος ἐστιν ὁ πλάνος καὶ ὁ ἀντίχριστος οτι πολλοι πλανοι εισηλθον εις τον κοσμον οι μη ομολογουντες ιησουν χριστον ερχομενον εν σαρκι ουτος εστιν ο πλανος και ο αντιχριστος οτι πολλοι πλανοι εισηλθον εις τον κοσμον οι μη ομολογουντες ιησουν χριστον ερχομενον εν σαρκι ουτος εστιν ο πλανος και ο αντιχριστος

1 Mark 8:16b (NET) Table

2 Mark 8:15b (NET)

3 1 John 2:23b (NET) Table

4 The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had ἐξῆλθον here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had εισηλθον (KJV: are entered).

5 1 John 4:1 (NET)

6 Matthew 12:30 (NET)

8 Ibid.

10 Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, 1975, “Reception and controversy,” E. O. Wilson

11 “God and religion,” E. O. Wilson

13 John 12:31 (NET)

14 John 12:32 (NET)

15 Luke 24:25b (NET)

16 1 John 4:2, 3 (NET) Table

17 2 John 1:7 (NET)

18 Luke 24:25b (NET)

The Day of the Lord, Part 5

Posted on by

This is a continuation of my consideration whether my assumption that Jesus called Judas Iscariot ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας (NET: the one destined for destruction) is like Jesus’ disciples’ discussion about having no bread1 after He said: “Watch out! Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and the yeast of Herod!”2

Paul wrote (2 Thessalonians 2:1-6 NET):

Now regarding the arrival of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to be with him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, not to be easily shaken from your composure or disturbed by any kind of spirit or message or letter allegedly from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord is already here. Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not arrive until the rebellion comes and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction (ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας) [Table]. He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, and as a result he takes his seat in God’s temple, displaying himself as God [Table]. Surely you recall that I used to tell you these things while I was still with you. And so you know what holds him back, so that he will be revealed in his own time.

The interpretation of many of the Church Fathers was summarized in Meyer’s NT Commentary:

The apocalyptic teaching of the apostle in chap. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 has occupied Christians of all times, and has been very variously interpreted. A chief distinction in the interpretations consists in this, that this Pauline prediction may be considered either as that which will be fulfilled in the near or more distant future, or as having already received its fulfilment.

I. The Church Fathers belong to the representatives of the first view…They correctly agree in considering that by the advent (2 Thessalonians 2:1; 2 Thessalonians 2:8), or the day of the Lord (2 Thessalonians 2:2), is to be understood the personal advent of Christ for the last judgment and for the completion of the Messianic kingdom. Also it is correctly regarded as proved, that the Antichrist here described is to be considered as an individual person, in whom sin will embody itself…The restraining power by which the appearance of Antichrist is delayed, is usually considered to be the continuance of the Roman Empire (τὸ κατέχον) and its representative the Roman emperor (ὁ κατέχων).

And thus the “Who is the Antichrist?” guessing game began. There isn’t anything intrinsically wrong with a guessing game, I suppose. Jesus let his disciples guess who would betray Him, during dinner the night He was betrayed.

Matthew 26:21-23 (NET)

Mark 14:18-20 (NET)

Luke 22:21-23 (NET)

John 13:21, 22 (NET)
And while they were eating he said, While they were at the table eating, Jesus said, When he had said these things, Jesus was greatly distressed in spirit, and testified,
“But look, the hand of the one who betrays (παραδιδόντος) me is with me on the table.
“I tell you the truth, one of you will betray (παραδώσει) me.” “I tell you the truth, one of you eating with me will betray (παραδώσει) me.” “I tell you the solemn truth, one of you will betray (παραδώσει) me.”
For3 the Son of Man is to go just as it has been determined, but woe to that man by whom he is betrayed (παραδίδοται)!”
They became greatly distressed They4 were distressed, The disciples began to look at one another, worried and perplexed to know which of them he was talking about.
So they began to question one another as to which of them it could possibly be who would do this.
and each one5 began to say to him, “Surely not I, Lord?” He answered, “The one who has dipped his hand into the bowl with me will betray (παραδώσει) me. and one by6 one said to him, “Surely not I?”7 He said8 to them, “It is one of9 the twelve, one who dips his hand with me into the bowl.

The tone of μήτι ἐγώ10 and μήτι ἐγώ εἰμι11 is more difficult to decipher than I expected. It’s not quite the open-ended Is it I? of the King James Version, something I’ve heard preached and intended to contrast here to the suspicion and accusation of the Antichrist guessing game. Surely not I? doesn’t feel quite right either. The Greek question seems to be a more hesitant denial, seeking independent confirmation or assurance from Jesus.

And I considered Luke’s account more closely this time: So they began to question one another as to which of them it could possibly be who would do this.12 The Greek word translated to question (συζητεῖν, an infinitive form of συζητέω) means “to seek together; to discuss, carry on a discussion; to reflect, mediate, contemplate, think.” But it can also mean “to dispute, debate, argue (with someone).”

The Greek words translated one another (πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς) do very little to dissuade me of the idea that Jesus’ disciples may have suspiciously accused one another. Since ἑαυτοὺς is in the accusative case, πρὸς means: “to; toward, in the direction of; beside; against; with; at.” As Luke’s account continued, it added a little more fuel to the fire of these suspicious accusations (Luke 22:24 NET).

A dispute (φιλονεικία) also (καὶ) started among them over which of them was to be regarded as the greatest.

Here again, Jesus’ disciples seem to have blocked out his “morbid fascination” with his own death because they “knew” He was the promised Messiah who would overthrow the Roman pagans and restore “faithful” Israel to its rightful place as the head and not the tail.13 Each one seemed most concerned about his own place in that new order.

John recorded a conclusion to the “Who is the betrayer?” guessing game, for his readers if not yet for the other disciples at that moment (John 13:23-26 NET):

One of his disciples, the one Jesus loved, was at the table to the right of Jesus in a place of honor [Table]. So Simon Peter gestured to this disciple to ask Jesus who it was he was referring to. Then the disciple whom Jesus loved leaned back against Jesus’ chest and asked him, “Lord, who is it?” Jesus replied, “It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread after I have dipped it in the dish.” Then he dipped the piece of bread in the dish and gave it to Judas Iscariot (John 13:18), Simon’s son [Table].

John was also the one who described antichrist (1 John 2:18, 19 NET):

Children, it is the last hour, and just as you heard that the14 antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. We know from this that it is the last hour. They went out15 from us, but they did not really belong to us because if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But they went out from us to demonstrate that all of them do not belong to us.

First, John affirmed that ἀντίχριστος ἔρχεται (NET: antichrist is coming). The Greek verb ἔρχεται is a singular form of the verb ἔρχομαι in the present tense. A note in the Koine Greek Lexicon explained: “The present is sometimes used with the force of the future.” Whether this is one of those times is a matter of interpretation, since John continued: καὶ νῦν ἀντίχριστοι πολλοὶ γεγόνασιν (NET: so now many antichrists have appeared).

The Greek verb γεγόνασιν is a 3rd person plural form of γίνομαι in the perfect tense. “The basic thought of the perfect tense,” according to the entry in Greek Verbs (Shorter Definitions) on Resources for Learning New Testament Greek online:

…is that the progress of an action has been completed and the results of the action are continuing on, in full effect. In other words, the progress of the action has reached its culmination and the finished results are now in existence. Unlike the English perfect, which indicates a completed past action, the Greek perfect tense indicates the continuation and present state of a completed past action.

This sounds similar to Paul’s affirmation that the man of lawlessness…the son of destruction16…will be revealed in his own time. For the hidden power of lawlessness is already at work.17 John proceeded to characterize the many antichrists.

1. They went out from us…

This was ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐξῆλθαν or ἐξῆλθον in Greek. The difference is insignificant: ἐξῆλθαν and ἐξῆλθον are both 3rd person plural forms of ἐξέρχομαι. (The latter might also be understood as a 1st person singular form.) I assume that ἡμῶν (NET: us) refers to the visible church generally. But John may have meant visible church leaders or even apparent apostles more specifically.

Consider how he began this letter (1 John 1:1-3 NET):

This is what we proclaim to you:18 what was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our (ἡμῶν) eyes, what we have looked at and our (ἡμῶν) hands have touched (concerning the word of life—and the life was revealed, and we have seen and testify and announce to you [ὑμῖν] the eternal life that was with the Father and was revealed to us [ἡμῖν]). What we have seen and heard we announce to you (ὑμῖν) too,19 so that you (ὑμεῖς) may have fellowship with us [ἡμῶν] (and indeed our [ἡμετέρα]20 fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ).

Is the ἐξῆλθαν or ἐξῆλθον of the many antichrists equivalent to the rebellion21 (ἡ ἀποστασία) of which Paul wrote? I would assume so, unless John’s second characterization of the many antichrists precludes that possibility.

2. …but they did not really belong to us…

The Greek here is ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ ἦσαν ἐξ ἡμῶν (literally: “but existed not from us”). I take that to mean that at the time They went out, the many antichrists were not yet born from above, not yet born of the Spirit, not yet born…by God. John continued to explain: because if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But they went out from us to demonstrate (φανερωθῶσιν) that all of them do not belong to us.22

Then John contrasted the many antichrists to his faithful readers (1 John 2:20, 21 NET):

Nevertheless you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all23 know. I have not written to you that you do not know the truth, but that you do know it (αὐτὴν), and that no lie is of the truth.

3. …the antichrist…denies the Father and the Son

This led him to another characterization of antichrist, which I assume applies to the many antichrists as well (1 John 2:22, 23 NET).

Who is the liar but the person who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This one is the antichrist (ὁ ἀντίχριστος): the person who denies the Father and the Son. Everyone who denies the Son does not have the Father either. The person who confesses the Son has the Father also.24

The Greek word translated denies all three times above was ἀρνούμενος, a present participle of the verb ἀρνέομαι: “to say that a statement heard or presented is untrue; to deny (the value of or validity of); to contradict, disavow, reject, abnegate, refuse, disown; to refuse (to do); to repent.” If you had asked me sometime before I became an atheist if I denied that Jesus is the Christ or if I denied the Father and the Son, I would have said “no.” And as far as I understood it, that was true.

I denied his “value” and “validity” all day every day, however, not out of any particular malice but, out of ignorance. I didn’t know Him. What I “knew” of imputed righteousness (Romans 4:22-25 KJV) was that it was a figment of God’s imagination, a mind game He played on Himself. Likewise, the righteousness of God without the law (Romans 3:21-24 KJV) was the same divine play pretending. I “knew” the only way to make it real was for me to obey the rules: the laws of the Old Testament, the commands of the New, along with those of my parents, teachers, coaches, pastors, doctors, city laws, county laws, state laws, national laws and on and on and on.

Is that what I was taught? I don’t remember what I was taught. It seems almost impossible to disentangle what I was taught from what I learned, sixty years or so after the fact. Maybe I was stupid, probably I didn’t pay enough attention, perhaps I wasn’t actually born from above just because I said a sinner’s prayer to Jesus so I wouldn’t burn in hell for all eternity when I was five-years-old. I do recall that the adults over me expected me to obey them—immediately.

The fastest way to do that was in my own strength. I expected Jesus to help. But He didn’t help me have my own righteousness derived from the law. And there didn’t seem to be much time or patience afforded to me to figure out how to live by the righteousness that comes by way of Christ’s faithfulness—a righteousness from God that is in fact based on Christ’s faithfulness,25 even if I had believed that his righteousness was available to me, or such a way of life was possible through faith in Jesus Christ.

I’ll continue with this in another essay.

Tables comparing Deuteronomy 28:13 in the Tanakh, KJV and NET, and comparing the Greek of Deuteronomy 28:13 in the Septuagint (BLB and Elpenor), and tables comparing Matthew 26:22; Mark 14:19, 20; Luke 22:22; 1 John 2:18, 19; 1:3; 2:20 and 2:23 in the NET and KJV follow.

Deuteronomy 28:13 (Tanakh)

Deuteronomy 28:13 (KJV)

Deuteronomy 28:13 (NET)
And HaShem will make thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath; if thou shalt hearken unto the commandments of HaShem thy G-d, which I command thee this day, to observe and to do them; And the LORD shall make thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath; if that thou hearken unto the commandments of the LORD thy God, which I command thee this day, to observe and to do them: The Lord will make you the head and not the tail, and you will always end up at the top and not at the bottom, if you obey his commandments that I am urging you today to be careful to do.

Deuteronomy 28:13 (Septuagint BLB)

Deuteronomy 28:13 (Septuagint Elpenor)
καταστήσαι σε κύριος ὁ θεός σου εἰς κεφαλὴν καὶ μὴ εἰς οὐράν καὶ ἔσῃ τότε ἐπάνω καὶ οὐκ ἔσῃ ὑποκάτω ἐὰν ἀκούσῃς τῶν ἐντολῶν κυρίου τοῦ θεοῦ σου ὅσα ἐγὼ ἐντέλλομαί σοι σήμερον φυλάσσειν καὶ ποιεῖν καταστήσαι σε Κύριος ὁ Θεός σου εἰς κεφαλὴν καὶ μὴ εἰς οὐράν, καὶ ἔσῃ τότε ἐπάνω καὶ οὐκ ἔσῃ ὑποκάτω, ἐὰν ἀκούσῃς τῆς φωνῆς Κυρίου τοῦ Θεοῦ σου, ὅσα ἐγὼ ἐντέλλομαί σοι σήμερον φυλάσσειν καὶ ποιεῖν

Deuteronomy 28:13 (NETS)

Deuteronomy 28:13 (English Elpenor)
May the Lord your God set you up as a head and not as a tail, and you shall then be on top, and you shall not be underneath—if you hear the commandments of the Lord your God, which I command you today, to guard and to perform. The Lord thy God make thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt then be above and thou shalt not be below, if thou wilt hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God, in all things that I charge thee this day to observe.

Matthew 26:22 (NET)

Matthew 26:22 (KJV)
They became greatly distressed and each one began to say to him, “Surely not I, Lord?” And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I?

Matthew 26:22 (NET Parallel Greek)

Matthew 26:22 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

Matthew 26:22 (Byzantine Majority Text)
καὶ λυπούμενοι σφόδρα ἤρξαντο λέγειν αὐτῷ εἷς ἕκαστος· μήτι ἐγώ εἰμι, κύριε και λυπουμενοι σφοδρα ηρξαντο λεγειν αυτω εκαστος αυτων μητι εγω ειμι κυριε και λυπουμενοι σφοδρα ηρξαντο λεγειν αυτω εκαστος αυτων μητι εγω ειμι κυριε

Mark 14:19, 20 (NET)

Mark 14:19, 20 (KJV)
They were distressed, and one by one said to him, “Surely not I?” And they began to be sorrowful, and to say unto him one by one, Is it I? and another said, Is it I?

Mark 14:19 (NET Parallel Greek)

Mark 14:19 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

Mark 14:19 (Byzantine Majority Text)
ἤρξαντο λυπεῖσθαι καὶ λέγειν αὐτῷ εἷς κατὰ εἷς· μήτι ἐγώ οι δε ηρξαντο λυπεισθαι και λεγειν αυτω εις καθ εις μητι εγω και αλλος μητι εγω οι δε ηρξαντο λυπεισθαι και λεγειν αυτω εις καθ εις μητι εγω και αλλος μητι εγω
He said to them, “It is one of the twelve, one who dips his hand with me into the bowl. And he answered and said unto them, It is one of the twelve, that dippeth with me in the dish.

Mark 14:20 (NET Parallel Greek)

Mark 14:20 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

Mark 14:20 (Byzantine Majority Text)
ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· εἷς τῶν δώδεκα, ὁ ἐμβαπτόμενος μετ᾿ ἐμοῦ εἰς τὸ τρύβλιον ο δε αποκριθεις ειπεν αυτοις εις εκ των δωδεκα ο εμβαπτομενος μετ εμου εις το τρυβλιον ο δε αποκριθεις ειπεν αυτοις εις εκ των δωδεκα ο εμβαπτομενος μετ εμου εις το τρυβλιον

Luke 22:22 (NET)

Luke 22:22 (KJV)
For the Son of Man is to go just as it has been determined, but woe to that man by whom he is betrayed!” And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!

Luke 22:22 (NET Parallel Greek)

Luke 22:22 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

Luke 22:22 (Byzantine Majority Text)
ὅτι ὁ υἱὸς μὲν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου κατὰ τὸ ὡρισμένον πορεύεται, πλὴν οὐαὶ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ἐκείνῳ δι᾿ οὗ παραδίδοται και ο μεν υιος του ανθρωπου πορευεται κατα το ωρισμενον πλην ουαι τω ανθρωπω εκεινω δι ου παραδιδοται και ο μεν υιος του ανθρωπου πορευεται κατα το ωρισμενον πλην ουαι τω ανθρωπω εκεινω δι ου παραδιδοται

1 John 2:18, 19 (NET)

1 John 2:18, 19 (KJV)
Children, it is the last hour, and just as you heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. We know from this that it is the last hour. Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

1 John 2:18 (NET Parallel Greek)

1 John 2:18 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

1 John 2:18 (Byzantine Majority Text)
Παιδία, ἐσχάτη ὥρα ἐστίν, καὶ καθὼς ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἀντίχριστος ἔρχεται, καὶ νῦν ἀντίχριστοι πολλοὶ γεγόνασιν, ὅθεν γινώσκομεν ὅτι ἐσχάτη ὥρα ἐστίν παιδια εσχατη ωρα εστιν και καθως ηκουσατε οτι ο αντιχριστος ερχεται και νυν αντιχριστοι πολλοι γεγονασιν οθεν γινωσκομεν οτι εσχατη ωρα εστιν παιδια εσχατη ωρα εστιν και καθως ηκουσατε οτι ο αντιχριστος ερχεται και νυν αντιχριστοι πολλοι γεγονασιν οθεν γινωσκομεν οτι εσχατη ωρα εστιν
They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us because if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But they went out from us to demonstrate that all of them do not belong to us. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

1 John 2:19 (NET Parallel Greek)

1 John 2:19 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

1 John 2:19 (Byzantine Majority Text)
ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐξῆλθαν ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ ἦσαν ἐξ ἡμῶν· εἰ γὰρ ἐξ ἡμῶν ἦσαν, μεμενήκεισαν ἂν μεθ᾿ ἡμῶν· ἀλλ᾿ ἵνα φανερωθῶσιν ὅτι οὐκ εἰσὶν πάντες ἐξ ἡμῶν εξ ημων εξηλθον αλλ ουκ ησαν εξ ημων ει γαρ ησαν εξ ημων μεμενηκεισαν αν μεθ ημων αλλ ινα φανερωθωσιν οτι ουκ εισιν παντες εξ ημων εξ ημων εξηλθον αλλ ουκ ησαν εξ ημων ει γαρ ησαν εξ ημων μεμενηκεισαν αν μεθ ημων αλλ ινα φανερωθωσιν οτι ουκ εισιν παντες εξ ημων

1 John 1:3 (NET)

1 John 1:3 (KJV)
What we have seen and heard we announce to you too, so that you may have fellowship with us (and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ). That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.

1 John 1:3 (NET Parallel Greek)

1 John 1:3 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

1 John 1:3 (Byzantine Majority Text)
ὃ ἑωράκαμεν καὶ ἀκηκόαμεν, ἀπαγγέλλομεν καὶ ὑμῖν, ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς κοινωνίαν ἔχητε μεθ᾿ ἡμῶν. (καὶ ἡ κοινωνία δὲ ἡ ἡμετέρα μετὰ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.) ο εωρακαμεν και ακηκοαμεν απαγγελλομεν υμιν ινα και υμεις κοινωνιαν εχητε μεθ ημων και η κοινωνια δε η ημετερα μετα του πατρος και μετα του υιου αυτου ιησου χριστου ο εωρακαμεν και ακηκοαμεν απαγγελλομεν υμιν ινα και υμεις κοινωνιαν εχητε μεθ ημων και η κοινωνια δε η ημετερα μετα του πατρος και μετα του υιου αυτου ιησου χριστου

1 John 2:20 (NET)

1 John 2:20 (KJV)
Nevertheless you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know. But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.

1 John 2:20 (NET Parallel Greek)

1 John 2:20 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

1 John 2:20 (Byzantine Majority Text)
καὶ ὑμεῖς χρῖσμα ἔχετε ἀπὸ τοῦ ἁγίου |καὶ| οἴδατε πάντες και υμεις χρισμα εχετε απο του αγιου και οιδατε παντα και υμεις χρισμα εχετε απο του αγιου και οιδατε παντα

1 John 2:23 (NET)

1 John 2:23 (KJV)
Everyone who denies the Son does not have the Father either. The person who confesses the Son has the Father also. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

1 John 2:23 (NET Parallel Greek)

1 John 2:23 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

1 John 2:23 (Byzantine Majority Text)
πᾶς ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν υἱὸν οὐδὲ τὸν πατέρα ἔχει, ὁ ὁμολογῶν τὸν υἱὸν καὶ τὸν πατέρα ἔχει πας ο αρνουμενος τον υιον ουδε τον πατερα εχει πας ο αρνουμενος τον υιον ουδε τον πατερα εχει

1 Mark 8:16b (NET) Table

2 Mark 8:15b (NET)

3 The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had ὅτι here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had και (KJV: And).

4 The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had οι δε (KJV: And) at the beginning of this clause. The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 did not.

5 The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had εἷς preceding each (KJV: every one), while the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had αυτων (KJV: of them) following every one (NET: each).

7 The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had και αλλος μητι εγω (KJV: and another said, Is it I?) here. The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 did not.

8 The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had αποκριθεις (KJV: answered and) preceding he said. The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 did not.

10 Mark 14:19

11 Matthew 26:22

12 Luke 22:23 (NET)

13 Deuteronomy 28:13 (NET)

14 The Stephanus Textus Receptus had the article ο preceding antichrist. The NET parallel Greek text, NA28 and Byzantine Majority Text did not.

16 2 Thessalonians 2:3b (NET) Table

17 2 Thessalonians 2:6b, 7a (NET)

18 NET note 1: The phrase “This is what we proclaim to you” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to clarify the English. The main verb which governs all of these relative clauses is ἀπαγγέλλομεν (apangellomen) in v. 3. This is important for the proper understanding of the relative clauses in v. 1, because the main verb ἀπαγγέλλομεν in v. 3 makes it clear that all of the relative clauses in vv. 1 and 3 are the objects of the author’s proclamation to the readers rather than the subjects. To indicate this the phrase “This is what we proclaim to you” has been supplied at the beginning of v. 1.

20 I assume that John used a different word here for our (ἡμετέρα, a singular form of ἡμέτερος in the 1st person) to include his readers in the fellowship…with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ, rather than to limit that fellowship to visible church leaders or apostles, actual or apparent.

21 2 Thessalonians 2:3 (NET) Table

22 1 John 2:19b (NET)

23 The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had πάντες here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had παντα (KJV: all things).

24 The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had ὁ ὁμολογῶν τὸν υἱὸν καὶ τὸν πατέρα ἔχει (NET: The person who confesses the Son has the Father also) here. The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text did not.

25 Philippians 3:9 (NET)

Antichrist, Part 2

Posted on by

Before I could write about Lars von Trier’s movie, I had to return to what John the Apostle had to say about antichrist (ἀντίχριστος).[1]  1 John 2:3-6 served as a preface and point of departure for that study.

Now by this we know that we have come to know God: if we keep his commandments.  The one who says “I have come to know God” and yet does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in such a person.  But whoever obeys his word, truly in this person the love (ἀγάπη)[2] of God has been perfected (τετελείωται, a form of τελειόω).[3]

In other words God’s ἀγάπη, when it is perfected, empowers me to keep his commandments.  For this is the love (ἀγάπη) of God: that we keep his commandments, John penned later in the same letter.  And his commandments do not weigh us down, because everyone who has been fathered by God conquers the world.[4]  Or as Paul said, ἀγάπη is the fulfillment of the law,[5] and, the one bringing forth in you both the desire (θέλειν)[6] and the effort – for the sake of his good pleasure – is God.[7]

God’s ἀγάπη is perfected in me by faith: we have come to know and to believe the love (ἀγάπην, another form of ἀγάπη) that God has in us.  God is love (ἀγάπη), and the one who resides in love (ἀγάπη) resides in God, and God resides in him [Table].  By this love (ἀγάπη) is perfected (τετελείωται, a form of τελειόω) with us…[8]  Not only the ἀγάπη but the faith was supplied by God—But the fruit of the Spirit is love (ἀγάπη), joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness (πίστις)[9]—if I had but gotten out of his way.  My religious mind stumbled over John’s statement, The one who says “I have come to know God” and yet does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in such a person.[10]

I thought I could avoid the stigma of being called a liar and prove myself true by obeying—first the law then Paul’s definition of love—in my own strength.  I set aside God’s grace, because if righteousness could come through the law, then Christ died for nothing![11]  A note in the NET on the phrase love of God (1 John 5:3 NET), reads: “Once again the genitive could be understood as (1) objective, (2) subjective, or (3) both.  Here an objective sense is more likely (believers’ love for God) because in the previous verse it is clear that God is the object of believers’ love.”  What is far more obvious to me now is that my love for God was not sufficient to keep his commandments, and all my efforts to do so did weigh [me] down, when compared to being buoyed up by the fruit of his Spirit.

Still, I had received the desire (θέλειν) to keep his commandments, though God’s love was not yet perfected in me.  For I want (θέλειν) to do the good, Paul lamented in Romans, but I cannot do it.[12]  My friends’ desires, on the other hand, did not suddenly change.  And nothing I said mattered to them.  Their ongoing sinful behavior tormented me.  Why don’t they see? I wondered.

Lord, they themselves know that I imprisoned and beat those in the various synagogues who believed in you,[13] Paul replied when the Lord had said to him, Hurry and get out of Jerusalem quickly, because they will not accept your testimony about me.[14]  And when the blood of your witness Stephen was shed, Paul continued, I myself was standing nearby, approving, and guarding the cloaks of those who were killing him.[15]  It seemed to me that since someone like I was had changed (repented) that everyone should change.  By this we know that we are in him, John wrote.  The one who says he resides in God ought (ὀφείλει, a form of ὀφείλω)[16] himself to walk just as Jesus walked.[17]

There is nothing wrong with translating ὀφείλει ought:  “We have a law, and according to our law he ought (ὀφείλει, a form of ὀφείλω) to die, because he claimed to be the Son of God!”[18] religious leaders said of Jesus.  But with my predilection for proving myself—“what I could do for God”—I need to remember that to owe is the primary meaning of ὀφείλει:  Now if [Onesimus] has defrauded you of anything, Paul wrote Philemon, or owes (ὀφείλει, a form of ὀφείλω) you anything, charge what he owes to me.[19]  My religious mind has used ought to turn John’s statement on its head.  I have believed that anything but absolute conformity on my part to walk just as Jesus walked is proof that I am not in him and do not reside in God, despite the fact that a sense of obligation, that I owe this to Him, has been with me since I believed.  My friends did not think they owed this to God, or anyone else, simply because I began to believe.

Children, it is the last hour, John wrote, and just as you heard that the antichrist (ἀντίχριστος) is coming, so now many antichrists (ἀντίχριστοι, a form of ἀντίχριστος) have appeared.  We know from this that it is the last hour.  They went out (ἐξῆλθαν, a form of ἐξέρχομαι)[20] from us, but they did not really belong to us, because if they had belonged to us, they would have remained (μεμενήκεισαν, a form of μένω)[21] with us.  But they went out from us to demonstrate that all of them do not belong to us.[22]  And I think 1 John 2:3-6 has more to do with the antichrists’ point of departure—They went out from us—than any geographical or institutional location.

To sense the obligation to walk just as Jesus walked while being imperfect in God’s love is a state of dynamic tension.  Though I didn’t realize it at the time, seeking to obey the law or Paul’s definition of love in my own strength was a way to ease that tension.  After all, no one, not even Jesus, could expect me to be as perfect as He is in my own strength.  I was completely aware that I was easing that tension when I deliberately abandoned my obligation to walk just as Jesus walked because “it didn’t matter what I did, because I was forgiven and because I was not under law but under grace” (as some of my new friends interpreted and preached the Apostle Paul).

Still, He always brought me back from the latter excursions:  Now as for you, John wrote, the anointing that you received from him resides (μένει, another form of μένω)[23] in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you.  But as his anointing teaches you about all things, it is true and is not a lie.  Just as it has taught you, you reside (μένετε, another form of μένω) in him.[24]  If you love me, Jesus said, you will obey (τηρήσετε, a form of τηρέω) my commandments.  Then I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you forever – the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot accept, because it does not see him or know him.  But you know him, because he resides (μένει) with you and will be in (ἐν)[25] you.[26]

The former excursions (though less like excursions and more like my lifestyle) were a bit more intractable.  After all, wasn’t God pleased by my noble efforts to keep the law or Paul’s definition of love?   Who is the liar, John wrote, but the person who denies that Jesus is the Christ?  This one is the antichrist: the person who denies the Father and the Son.  Everyone who denies the Son does not have the Father either.  The person who confesses the Son has the Father also.[27]

I didn’t deny Jesus with my mouth.  I honored Him with my lips.  But in my heart I rejected the righteousness that comes by way of Christ’s faithfulness in favor of my own righteousness derived from the law[28] or Paul’s definition of ἀγάπη.  I was certainly hearing some of the things I’ve written about here.  I did attempt from time to time to trust Him with MY righteousness.  It wasn’t that I was better somehow at it than He was.  It was that I demanded 100% compliance from Him (e.g., from me when He was in charge) but I was much more lenient with myself when I took control.

Dear friends, John continued, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to determine if they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.  By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses Jesus as the Christ who has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God, and this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming, and now is already in the world.[29]  For me now this means more than paying lip service to Jesus.  Does the spirit encourage me to trust God’s credited righteousness, to rely on the fruit of his Spirit?  Or does the spirit encourage me to turn back to my own ways, striving in my own strength to keep his commandments?

Again John wrote of antichrist: But now I ask you, lady (not as if I were writing a new commandment to you, but the one we have had from the beginning), that we love one another.  (Now this is love: that we walk according to his commandments.)  This is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning; thus you should walk in it.  For many deceivers have gone out into the world, people who do not confess Jesus as Christ coming in the flesh.  This person is the deceiver and the antichrist!  Watch out, so that you do not lose the things we have worked for, but receive a full reward.[30]

John wrote his own ode to the love that fulfills the law (1 John 4:7-19 NET).

Dear friends, let us love (ἀγαπῶμεν, a form of ἀγαπάω) one another, because love (ἀγάπη) is from God, and everyone who loves (ἀγαπῶν, another form of ἀγαπάω) has been fathered by God and knows God.  The person who does not love (ἀγαπῶν, another form of ἀγαπάω) does not know God, because God is love (ἀγάπη).  By this the love (ἀγάπη) of God is revealed in us: that God has sent his one and only Son into the world so that we may live through him.  In this is love (ἀγάπη): not that we have loved (ἠγαπήκαμεν, another form of ἀγαπάω) God, but that he loved (ἠγάπησεν, another form of ἀγαπάω) us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.

Dear friends, if God so loved (ἠγάπησεν, another form of ἀγαπάω) us, then we also ought (ὀφείλομεν, another form of ὀφείλω) to love (ἀγαπᾶν, another form of ἀγαπάω) one another.  No one has seen God at any time.  If we love (ἀγαπῶμεν, another form of ἀγαπάω) one another, God resides in us, and his love (ἀγάπη) is perfected (τετελειωμένη, another form of τελειόω) in us.  By this we know that we reside in God and he in us: in that he has given us of his Spirit.  And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.

If anyone confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God resides in him and he in God.  And we have come to know and to believe the love (ἀγάπην, another form of ἀγάπη) that God has in us.  God is love (ἀγάπη), and the one who resides in love (ἀγάπη) resides in God, and God resides[31] in him [Table].  By this love (ἀγάπη) is perfected (τετελείωται) with us, so that we may have confidence in the day of judgment, because just as Jesus is, so also are we in this world.  There is no fear in love (ἀγάπη), but perfect (τελεία, a form of τέλειος)[32] love (ἀγάπη) drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment.  The one who fears punishment has not been perfected (τετελείωται) in love (ἀγάπη).  We love (ἀγαπῶμεν, another form of ἀγαπάω) because he loved (ἠγάπησεν, another form of ἀγαπάω) us first.

Though Paul didn’t use the word antichrist he described a similar phenomenon of a religious person in whom God’s love is not perfected (1 Corinthians 13:1-3 NET).

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but I do not have love (ἀγάπην, another form of ἀγάπη), I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.  And if I have prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith so that I can remove mountains, but do not have love (ἀγάπην, another form of ἀγάπη), I am nothing.  If I give away everything I own, and if I give over my body in order to boast, but do not have love (ἀγάπην, another form of ἀγάπη), I receive no benefit.

The meaning (in words) of ἀγάπη does not come from an understanding of a word in the Greek language, but from the following (1 Corinthians 13:4-13 NET):

Love (ἀγάπη) is patient, love (ἀγάπη) is kind, it is not envious. Love (ἀγάπη) does not brag, it is not puffed up.  It is not rude, it is not self-serving, it is not easily angered or resentful.  It is not glad about injustice, but rejoices in the truth.  It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Love (ἀγάπη) never ends.  But if there are prophecies, they will be set aside; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be set aside.  For we know in part, and we prophesy in part, but when what is perfect (τέλειον, another form of τέλειος) comes, the partial will be set aside.  When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child.  But when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways.  For now we see in a mirror indirectly, but then we will see face to face.  Now I know in part, but then I will know fully, just as I have been fully known.  And now these three remain: faith, hope, and love (ἀγάπη).  But the greatest of these is love (ἀγάπη).

[3] 1 John 2:3-5a (NET)

[4] 1 John 5:3, 4a (NET)

[5] Romans 13:10b (NET)

[7] Philippians 2:13 (NET)

[8] 1 John 4:16-18a (NET)

[9] Galatians 5:22 (NET)

[10] 1 John 2:4 (NET)

[11] Galatians 2:21 (NET)

[12] Romans 7:18b (NET)

[13] Acts 22:19 (NET)

[14] Acts 22:18 (NET) Table

[15] Acts 22:20 (NET)

[17] 1 John 2:5b, 6 (NET)

[18] John 19:7 (NET)

[19] Philemon 1:18 (NET)

[22] 1 John 2:18, 19 (NET)

[24] 1 John 2:27 (NET)

[26] John 14:15-17 (NET)

[27] 1 John 2:22, 23 (NET)

[28] Philippians 3:9 (NET)

[29] 1 John 4:1-3 (NET)

[30] 2 John 1:5-8 (NET)