Tag: Paraclete

Saturday Series: John 16:8-9

John 16:8-9

In this continuing study on sin in the Johannine writings (Gospel and Letters of John), we turn now to the Paraclete saying in 16:7-15. This is the fourth (and final) such saying in the Last Discourse, the prior three coming in 14:16-17, 25-26, and 15:26-27. I have recently discussed these in some detail in a set of notes and articles, part of the series “Spiritualism and the New Testament”. The term “Paraclete” is an anglicized transliteration of the descriptive title parákl¢tos (para/klhto$), which means “(one) called alongside” —that is, to give help or assistance. It is a title of the Spirit, which Jesus promises will come to the disciples, after he has been exalted and has returned to the Father in heaven.

In 1 John 2:1, the only other occurrence of parákl¢tos in the New Testament, it is Jesus himself who is referred to as “(one) called alongside”, to give help to believers, specifically through the act of interceding before God the Father on believers’ behalf (in matters related to sin). In 14:16, the first Paraclete-saying in the Gospel, the Spirit is referred to as “another parákl¢tos“, implying that Jesus was the first. Indeed, in many ways, the Spirit-Paraclete continues the work of Jesus in and among his disciples (believers). Jesus continues to be present, speaking to believers through the Spirit, teaching them. For more on this, see the articles on the Paraclete-sayings (1, 2, 3, 4).

The final Paraclete-saying (16:7-15) occurs in the last of the three Discourse-divisions (16:4b-28), which has the following general outline:

    • 16:4b-28—Discourse/division 3—Jesus’ departure (farewell)
      • The Promise of the Spirit (vv. 4b-15)
      • Jesus’ Departure and Return (vv. 16-24)
      • Concluding statement by Jesus on his departure (vv. 25-28)

The promise of the coming of the Spirit (vv. 4b-15) is thus tied to the departure of Jesus (back to the Father in heaven). He speaks as he does to his disciples because he soon will no longer be with them, at least in a physical sense. And he still has many things he must yet say to his disciples (and all believers), v. 12. For this reason, it is necessary for the Spirit to come, to be present with (“alongside”) believers, and to remain in/among them:

“But I say the truth to you: it bears together (well) for you that I should go away from (you). For, if I should not go away, (then) the (one) called alongside [parákl¢tos] will not come to you; but, if I do travel (away), I will send him to you.” (v. 7)

It is actually beneficial to the disciples (and to future believers) that Jesus should go away (back to the Father). Though he will no longer be present with them physically, as a human being, he can still be present spiritually, through the Spirit. In each of the Paraclete-sayings, Jesus explains certain aspects of the Spirit’s role. He continues that teaching here in verses 8ff:

“And, (hav)ing come, that (one) will show the world (to be wrong), about sin, and about righteousness, and about judgment” (v. 8)

In the previous Paraclete-saying (15:26-27), the emphasis was on the Spirit as a witness—specifically, a witness to the truth of who Jesus is (v. 26). The Spirit will give witness of this to the disciples, but also to the world, through the disciples. The essence of this witness is further explained here, utilizing the verb eléngchœ. The basic meaning of this verb is to show someone to be wrong. It occurs two other places in the Gospel—in 3:20 and 8:46. The first occurrence is close in context to the use here: it refers to a person’s evil deeds being shown to be evil, exposed as such by the light of Jesus Christ—and by the Gospel witness to the truth of his identity as the Son of God. The reference in 8:46, where the verb is used, as it is here, specifically in connection with sin, was discussed in an earlier study.

The Spirit will show the world to be wrong about three things, in particular: sin (hamartía), righteousness (dikaiosýn¢), and judgment (krísis). In the verses that follow (vv. 9-11), Jesus explains the basis upon which the Spirit shows the world to be wrong about each topic. The first topic he addresses is sin; his explanation is short and to the point:

“about sin, (in) that they do not trust in me” (v. 9)

In the prior studies, we have seen how the Johannine understanding of sin entails two distinct levels, or aspects, of meaning. First, there is sin as understood in the general or conventional ethical-religious sense, as wrongs/misdeeds that a person commits. And, second, there is sin in the theological sense, defined as the great sin of unbelief—that is, of failing or refusing to trust in Jesus as the Son of God. Here, the truth regarding sin is clearly defined in terms of the latter (“they do not trust in me”).

Many commentators take the verb eléngchœ here to mean that the Spirit convicts the world of sin, of showing the people of the world to be sinful. While this aspect of meaning is not entirely absent, I do not consider it to be primary here. To be sure, the world (kósmos), dominated as it is by darkness and evil, and being opposed to God, is characteristically sinful. However, what the Spirit does, specifically, is to show the world to be wrong about sin. The world’s view and understanding of sin—that is, the nature and reality of sin—is fundamentally wrong. People may accept the conventional meaning of sin, and even seek to live in a righteous manner, avoiding sin, without realizing the true nature of sin. Even the seemingly righteous people—such as religious Jews in Jesus’ own time, who followed the precepts of the Torah—were sinful, if they refused to trust in Jesus. Indeed, such people commit sin in its truest sense, since they commit the great sin of unbelief.

The explanation regarding the true nature of the judgment (krísis) alludes to this same theological-Christological understanding of sin. According to the conventional view, the judgment occurs at the end of the Age, at some point in the future, when all people will be judged for their deeds (i.e., sin in the conventional ethical-religious sense). However, according to Jesus, and the theology of the Gospel, the world (and its ruler) has already been judged:

“about judgment, (in) that the chief [i.e. ruler] of this world has been judged” (v. 11)

This judgment is based entirely on whether or not a person, when confronted with the Gospel witness, the truth about Jesus, trusts in him. The one who trusts in Jesus, has already passed through the judgment and holds eternal life, while the one who does not trust, has already been condemned. For the key references elsewhere in the Gospel, see 3:19-21; 5:22-24 (v. 24); 8:51; 12:31, 46-50. The subject was also discussed in the previous studies on 8:21ff and 9:39-41 / 15:22-24.

The judgment is realized through the exaltation of Jesus the Son of God. In the Johannine Gospel, the exaltation of Jesus is not limited to his resurrection or ascension; rather, it covers a process that begins with his Passion (suffering and death). This is particularly clear from the setting of the declaration in 12:31. The Son’s mission on earth, and the witness to his identity as the Son, reaches its climax with his death on the cross (19:30). Through his death, resurrection, and return to the Father, the Son is “lifted up”, and Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is manifest to anyone who would believe. This helps us to understand the second of the topics about which the Spirit will show the world to be wrong. In verse 10, Jesus explains the true nature of righteousness (dikaiosýn¢), as being defined in terms of the Son’s return to the Father. In other words, true righteousness is rooted in Jesus’ exaltation and his eternal identity as the Son. Believers experience righteousness only in relation to the Son.

For more detailed discussion on vv. 8-11, see my earlier article and set of notes.

Next week, we will turn our attention to the final two sin-references in the Gospel.

November 4: John 15:10 (continued)

John 15:10, continued

In order to understand what it means for a disciple/believer to “keep watch over” (vb thre/w) the e)ntolai/ of Jesus, it is necessary to examine how the Gospel of John understands Jesus’ fulfilling of the duties (e)ntolai/) given to him by God the Father. The pattern in verse 10 (continuing from v. 9), as discussed in the previous note, establishes this as the basis for our study: the believer is to fulfill the duties given by the Son (Jesus), just as the Son has fulfilled the duties given to him by the Father.

The noun used to express this concept is e)ntolh/, which is typically translated as “command(ment)”, but this can be quite misleading, especially if one has in mind a set of written commands or regulations such as we find in the Torah. The term properly refers to a charge or duty that is placed upon a person, and which one is obligated to complete (vb e)nte/llomai). The verb does carry the sense of commanding (i.e., ordering) a person to do something.

The noun e)ntolh/ occurs 10 times in the Gospel of John, including three times here in the exposition of the Vine illustration (vv. 10, 12), while the verb e)nte/llomai occurs 4 times (and twice in the Vine exposition, vv. 14, 17); the noun also occurs 18 times in the Letters, including 14 in 1 John. Let us briefly examine the relevant occurrences in the Gospel prior to chapter 15.

10:17-18

“Through this, my Father loves me, (in) that I set (down) my soul, (so) that I might take it (up) again. No one takes it from me, but I set it (down) from myself. I hold (the) authority [e)cousi/a] to set it (down), and I hold authority to take it (up) again—this (is) the e)ntolh/ I received (from) alongside my Father.”

12:49-50

“I did not speak out of myself, but the (One hav)ing sent me, (the) Father, He has given me an e)ntolh/ (regarding) what I should say and what I should speak. And I have seen that His e)ntolh/ is (the) life of the Age(s) [i.e. eternal life]. Therefore, (with regard to) the (thing)s that I speak, just as the Father has said (it) to me, so I speak.”

In these two references, Jesus talks of receiving an e)ntolh/ from the Father. In the first instance (10:17-18), he has been given something to do—namely, to lay down his life, i.e., in a sacrificial death, so that he might “take it up” again (i.e., his resurrection). This is the mission (and duty) which the Father has given him to complete, and he has been given the authority/ability (by the Father) to complete it. At the moment of Jesus’ death, on the cross, he declares that the mission has been completed: “It has been completed [tete/lestai]” (19:30).

In the second instance (12:49-50), the mission or duty (e)ntolh/) regards things that he must say. The Father gives him the words to speak, much as He gives Jesus (the Son) the authority/ability (e)cousi/a) to lay down his life (and take it up again). This is an important Johannine theme, emphasizing that Jesus’ teaching, and the word that he speaks, comes from God. It is an evident witness of his identity as the Son of God that his words come from God, and not from himself. Like a dutiful Son, Jesus follows the example of his Father, doing what he sees his Father doing and saying what he hears his father saying.

It is significant that we have here two different e)ntolai/, and thus can use the plural of the noun. The duties placed on Jesus by the Father are: (1) to lay down his life and take it up again (death / resurrection), and (2) to speak the words of God that were given to him by the Father.

It is in this light that we must understand the use of the noun e)ntolh/ (and verb e)nte/llomai) in 14:15-21 and here in the Vine illustration. Both passages have the following emphases in common:

    • Fulfilling the duties (e)ntolh/) is closely connected with love (a)ga/ph, vb a)gapa/w)
    • The believer’s fulfilling of the duties follows the example/pattern of Jesus’ fulfilling of his duties; in so doing, there is a real sense that the believer shares in the love experienced (and possessed) by Jesus.
    • The pattern: the Son (Jesus) fulfills the duties given to him by the Father, and the believer fulfills the duties given by the Son.

If the duties of the believer are patterned after the Son’s duties, then we must look to the two examples, the two e)ntolai/, discussed above:

    • Action—laying down his life, indicating a willingness to endure death, for the sake of others
    • Speech—speaking the word(s) of God, given to him by the Father

How do these relate to the believer? The first e)ntolh/, that of a willingness to lay down one’s life, is best understood in terms of the ‘love command’ that Jesus gives to his disciples in the opening section of the Last Discourse:

“A new e)ntolh/ I give to you: that you shall love one another; just as I (have) loved you, so you shall love one another. In this, all (people) will know that you are my learners [i.e. disciples]—if you hold love among one another.” (13:34-35)

The duty for believers to love one another is based on the example provided by Jesus, of the love that he has shown. The narrative setting of chapter 13 clearly establishes this point (cf. the opening words in v. 1), associating Jesus’ love in the context of his impending death. The foot-washing (vv. 4-11, 12-17) is meant to symbolize and illustrate this sacrificial love, even to the point of death. If there were any doubt regarding the centrality of this thematic association, it is reinforced by the exchange between Jesus and Peter in vv. 36-38, and then is made explicit in 15:13 (to be discussed), at the heart of the Last Discourse, as Jesus instructs his disciples (and us as believers):

“Greater love than this no one holds: that one would set (down) his soul over [i.e. for the sake of] his dear (one)s.”

The language used to describe this willingness to lay down one’s life essentially matches what Jesus says of himself in 10:17-18 (cf. above).

Thus, one of the duties (e)ntolai/) of disciples/believers is to show sacrificial love to one another, following the example of Jesus himself, being willing to lay down one’s life for the sake of others.

What of the second duty? It should match the second duty for Jesus, as described in 12:49-50 (cf. above)—namely, to speak the word(s) given to him by God. The context of 14:15-21ff, prior to the Vine illustration, explains how the pattern applies to believers: the Son (Jesus) gives believers the word(s) (of God) to speak. The theme of fulfilling the duties (e)ntolai/), in this passage, is connected with the promise of the coming of the Spirit-Paraclete. There are two Paraclete-sayings by Jesus in this context:

    • Vv. 16-17—The Spirit (of truth) will be given to believers from the Father, and will be with/alongside them, and will remain (vb me/nw) in/among them.
    • Vv. 25-26—The Spirit will teach believers; this entails reminding them of the things Jesus said during his earthly ministry, but also that Jesus would continue to speak to them through the Spirit (cf. 15:26-27; 16:12-15).

The twin emphases of love (a)ga/ph) and the word (lo/go$/r(h=ma) serve as two distinct, but interrelated, strands that run through the passage, informing the meaning of the duty/mission (e)ntolh/) that believers must fulfill. The aspect of love is dominant in vv. 15-21, while the word is more prominent in vv. 23-24ff:

“If any (one) would love me, he will keep watch (over) my word [lo/go$], and my Father will love him, and we will come toward him, and will make our abode [monh/] alongside him. The (one) not loving me will not keep watch (over) my words [lo/goi]; and (indeed) the word [lo/go$] that you hear is not mine, but (is the) Father’s, the (One hav)ing sent me.”

Jesus has instructed his disciples both to remain (vb me/nw) in his word (8:31, cf. 15:7) and in his love (15:9-10). This reflects both of the e)ntolai/ that believers are obligated to fulfill—or, we may say, both aspects of the two-fold e)ntolh/ (the singular and plural of this noun being interchangeable in John) that is required of all true disciples/believers. Remaining in Jesus’ word/love also represent twin aspects of what it means to remain in him—i.e., in the Son himself. In the previous note, I illustrated this by the following diagram:

In closing, it is also important to emphasize again that the fulfilling of these duties follows the pattern of Jesus (the Son) himself, in the way that he completed the duties given to him by the Father:

“…(so) that world may know that I love the Father, even as the Father laid (the duty/mission) on me to complete [e)netei/lato], so I do (it).” (14:31)

Love is demonstrated by the completing of the duty/mission (e)ntolh/) that is given; and, of course, love itself is part of that duty. When we, as believers, fulfill that duty, we share in the love that is shared between Father and Son. We will examine this theme a bit further in the next daily note, when we turn to verse 11.

August 13: 1 John 2:20

1 John 2:20

Having considered the use of the title “the holy (one) of God” in Jn 6:69 (the confession by Peter, cp. Luke 9:20 par) in the previous note, I wish to examine now the same title (“the holy [one]”) in 1 John 2:20. In the previous discussion, I had mentioned that, within the Johannine theological context, the title “holy one of God” in Jn 6:69 contained an allusion to the important association between the Son (Jesus) and the holy Spirit of God. It is worth giving further consideration to the point by examining the evidence in the Gospel.

First, we have the Paraclete-saying in 14:25-26, in which the Spirit-Paraclete is specifically referred to as “the holy Spirit” (v. 26). In point of fact, the adjective a%gio$ is rather rare in the Gospel of John, occurring just five times. In addition to Peter’s confession (here, 6:69), and one occurrence in the Discourse-Prayer of Jesus (17:11, addressing God the Father), it is only used in three references to the Spirit (with the full, qualifying expression “[the] holy Spirit”, [to\] pneu=ma [to\] a&gion).

It is significant the way that these three Spirit-references frame the Gospel narrative, in relation to the ministry of Jesus (the incarnate Son of God) on earth:

    • 1:33—at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, part of the Johannine version (cf. also verse 26) of the saying by the Baptist (cp. Mark 1:8 par), alluding to the promise of Jesus’ giving the Spirit to believers: “(he) is the (one) dunking [i.e. baptizing] in (the) holy Spirit”.
    • 14:26—the Johannine narrative of Jesus’ ministry is structured around the great Discourses, culminating in the Last Discourse (13:31-16:33), in which Jesus gives the final teaching to his close circle of disciples (and true believers); the Paraclete-sayings deal with the coming of the Spirit, following Jesus’ teaching to this effect in the earlier Discourses—cf. the Spirit-references in 3:5-8, 34f; 4:10-15 [7:37-39], 23-24; 6:63.
    • 20:22—at the end of Jesus’ ministry, following the fulfillment of his mission (and his exaltation), Jesus finally gives the Spirit to his disciples (the first believers).

It is only natural that holy one of God (Jesus) would give the holy Spirit of God, particularly since the Son (Jesus) possesses the fullness of the Spirit, having received it from the Father (3:34-35). This Christological dynamic makes the use of the title “holy (one)” in 1 John 2:20 particularly intriguing:

“But you hold (the) anointing [xri=sma] from the holy (one) [o( a%gio$], and you have seen [i.e. known] all (thing)s.”

There is some debate among commentators as to whether the title o( a%gio$ (“the holy [one]”) refers specifically to Jesus (the Son) or God the Father. In the previous note, I discussed the use of the title “holy one” (in Hebrew, the use of the substantive adjective vodq* corresponds with a%gio$ in Greek). In the Old Testament Scriptures, almost exclusively it is used as a title for God the Father (YHWH)—particularly in the expression “the Holy One of Israel” (most frequent in the book of Isaiah)—and only very rarely is applied to human or angelic beings as God’s consecrated servants (Num 6:17; Psalm 106:16; Dan 8:13); the same usage is attested in the subsequent Jewish writings from the first centuries B.C./A.D.

By contrast, in the New Testament, “[the] holy one” ([o(] a%gio$) is predominantly a title, with Messianic significance, that is applied to Jesus—Mark 1:24 [par Lk 4:34]; Acts 2:27 and 13:35 [citing Ps 16:10]; Rev 3:7, and of course in John 6:69 (cf. also 10:36); the Messianic context of these references was discussed (and established) in the previous note. Only in Rev 16:5 is the title used in its more traditional religious-historical aspect, as an epithet of YHWH. Interestingly, as I had mentioned, the adjective a%gio$ is actually rather rare in the Johannine writings (Gospel and Letters), occurring just five times in the Gospel and once (here) in 1 John. In the Gospel, once it is applied to Jesus the Son (6:69), once to God the Father (17:11), and three times to the Spirit (i.e., “[the] holy Spirit,” 1:33; 14:26; 20:22).

Overall, the New Testament and Johannine usage favors o( a%gio$ (“the holy [one]”) here as a title of Jesus Christ (the Son).

Rather more certain, in my view, is the conclusion that the term xri=sma (“anointing”) here (and in v. 27) refers to the presence of the Spirit. The noun xri=sma occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, so there is little opportunity for comparative examination of word-usage. However, for reasons I detailed in the earlier article on 2:18-27, the anointing which believers received (v. 27) is best understood as a reference to the Spirit. Most likely, in common with other early Christians, the Johannine churches viewed the believer’s baptism as representing the moment when he/she received the Spirit (cf. Jn 1:33); to view the baptism as an ‘anointing’ by the Spirit was natural, drawing upon the type-pattern of Jesus’ own baptism (cf. especially the Lukan emphasis of 4:18ff, in light of 3:22; 4:1, 14). Also significant and influential are the Prophetic passages referring to God ‘pouring out’ the Spirit on His people in the New Age (cf. the Introduction to this series for the key passages).

But does the believer receive the Spirit from Jesus (the Son) or from God (the Father)? The immediate evidence from 1 John (3:24; 4:2ff, 13; 5:6-8ff) indicates the latter—that it is God the Father who gives us the Spirit. However, the Gospel emphasizes Jesus’ role in giving the Spirit (cf. above). According to the framework of the Johannine theology—expressed clearly in the Gospel, and only alluded to in the Letters—the Son (Jesus) receives the Spirit from the Father, and then, in turn, gives the Spirit to believers. The Father is the ultimate source, but the Son is the immediate giver; thus, there is a certain variability and interchangeability with how this is expressed in the Johannine writings (cf. for example, the variation in the Paraclete-sayings, in 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7b, 13-15).

The focus in 2:18-27 is on the person of Jesus—the Anointed One (xristo/$) and Son of God—and this would tend to confirm the point of reference for the title “holy one”. It also corresponds with the Messianic (and Christological) significance of the title in Jn 6:69, as was discussed in the previous note.

Yet in verse 27, the Divine subject, in relation to the anointing (xri=sma), is expressed more ambiguously:

“But (as for) you, the anointing which you received from him, it remains in you, and you do not have a need that any (one) should teach you; but, as his anointing teaches you about all (thing)s, and is true and is not false, and even as it (has) taught you, you must remain in him.”

The phrase “the anointing which you received from him” seems to allude back to verse 20; if the title “the holy one” refers to the Son (Jesus), then it is most likely that the pronoun of the prepositional expression “from him” (a)p’ au)tou=) also refers to Jesus. Turning ahead to verse 28, where Jesus is clearly the implied subject of the second clause, the implication is that the pronoun of the expression “in him” (e)n au)tw=|), at the end of v. 27 and beginning of v. 28, likewise refers to Jesus; certainly, there is no obvious indication of a change of reference. For the same reason, it would be simplest to interpret the qualifying subject “his anointing” (to\ au)tou= xri=sma) as meaning the anointing received from Jesus.

In other words, all the third person singular pronouns in vv. 27-28, refer primarily to Jesus Christ (the Son). It is he who gives the anointing (i.e., the Spirit) to believers, having himself received it from God the Father. As noted above, the Father is the ultimate source of the Spirit, but it is given through the mediation of the Son. Just as it was promised that the Jesus would baptize believers in the Spirit, so he anoints them, pouring out the Spirit upon them. Yet the anointing does not simply come from without, like physical liquid poured out on a person, but abides within; this is the clear significance of the use of the verb me/nw (“remain, abide”)—both here and throughout the Johannine writings. The anointing (i.e., the Spirit) remains within (cf. 3:24; 4:13; Jn 14:17), and is the means by which believers remain in the Son; and, in turn, it is through the presence of the Son that we remain in the Father (and He in us). This is the essence of the Johannine theology; even though it is expressed more clearly and precisely in the Gospel, the theology is equally present, in an implicit and allusive fashion, throughout 1 John.

 

Spiritualism and the New Testament: John: 1 Jn 2:28-3:24

1 John 2:28-3:24

The central theme of 1 John, the contrast between true and false believers, was established in the first section (1:5-2:17), utilizing the dualistic light/darkness motif. The two “antichrist” sections, 2:18-27 (cf. the previous article) and 4:1-6, focus primarily on the presence and activity of the false believers (i.e., the opponents), while the section in between (2:28-3:24)—the central section of the entire work—emphasizes the nature and character of the true believer. This is presented within three thematic subsections, framed by two essential exhortations related to the believer’s identity:

    • Opening exhortation: “remain in him” (2:28)
    • The believer in relation to sin and righteousness (2:29-3:10)
    • The believer in relation to love (3:11-18)
    • The two-fold duty [e)ntolh/] of believers (3:19-24a)
    • Closing assurance: “that he remains in us” (3:24b)

From an interpretative standpoint, the first subsection on sin and righteousness is the most difficult, particularly in 3:6-9, where the author makes statements which seem to contradict what he argued earlier in 1:8-2:2. I address the matter in a set of supplemental notes.

As it happens, sin (a(marti/a, vb a(marta/nw) and righteousness (dikaiosu/nh) are two of the three subjects mentioned in the Paraclete-saying of Jn 16:7b-11, of which the Spirit will bear witness, exposing the world and proving it to be wrong. And the exposition there of the true nature of sin (v. 9) and righteousness (v. 10) should be seen as having a bearing on the apparent contradiction between 1 Jn 1:8-2:2 and 3:6-9. The first passage explains how believers do sin, while the second passage explains how they do not sin. And, whatever else one may argue about the relationship of the believer to sin, as expressed in 1 John, one point is absolutely clear: the true believer will not (and cannot) sin in the primary sense of violating the great dual ‘command’ of 3:23-24—trust in Jesus (as the Messiah and Son of God), and love for other believers (following Jesus’ own example).

Important in this regard is the Johannine motif of believers coming to be born of God, as His offspring. This is introduced in 1 John at 2:29-3:1. First, there is the specialized use of the verb of becoming (genna/w) in 2:29:

“If you have seen that He is righteous [di/kaio$], (then) you know that every (one) doing righteousness [dikaiosu/nh] has come to be (born) [gege/nnhtai] out of Him.”

Then the use of the plural noun te/kna (“offspring, children”) occurs in 3:1:

“See what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called (the) offspring [te/kna] of God—and (so) we are. Through this [i.e. for this reason] the world does not know us, (in) that [i.e. because] it did not know Him.”

From the Johannine theological standpoint, “doing righteousness” essentially means remaining in God’s Son (Jesus), through the Spirit, since righteousness is defined principally in the person of Jesus, who (as God’s Son) manifests the righteousness of God (the Father). For more on this, cf. my recent note on the discussion of righteousness (dikaiosu/nh) in Jn 16:10. The person who does this righteousness shows himself/herself to be a true believer, a child of God who has come to be born out of Him.

As one remains in the Son (through the Spirit), one faithfully fulfills the two-fold duty (e)ntolh/) of trust and love. The latter (love, a)ga/ph) is particularly emphasized in this section, with sin defined largely in terms of a failure to love. By contrast, love is a fundamental characteristic of God Himself (4:16, etc), and his offspring will love in a similar manner. God first showed love to believers by giving them/us the ability to become His children (Jn 1:12-13; 3:3-8, 16ff, etc). This was achieved through the mission of His Son (v. 8), culminating in his sacrificial death, exaltation, and the sending of the Spirit.

The pairing of the verb genna/w and the noun te/kna is repeated in vv. 9-10:

“Every (one) having come to be (born) [gegennh/meno$] out of God does not do sin, (in) that His seed remains in him, and (so) he is not able to sin, (in) that he has come to be (born) [gege/nnhtai] out of God.” (v. 9)

The idea of “doing righteousness” (cf. above) is expressed here by its precise opposite, i.e., “not doing sin”. Not only has the believer come to be born out of God, but God’s seed (spe/rma) remains in the believer. This use of spe/rma provides support for commentators who would insist that the Johannine use of genna/w be understood primarily in the male sense of “beget” rather than the female “give birth”. I prefer to render genna/w in the more general (causative) sense of “cause to be (born),” which can be used of either a male or female parent.

Regardless of the specific birth/begetting imagery that is intended, there can be little doubt that the “coming to be” for the believer takes place in a spiritual way, through the Spirit, and that God’s “seed” that remains in the believer should be understood in reference to the Spirit. The usage in the Gospel would seem to make this quite clear. Let us begin with the statement in the Prologue, which follows the wording of 1 John in describing believers as coming to be born “out of God” (e)k qeou=):

“But, as many as received him, to them he gave (the) e)cousi/a to become [gene/sqai] (the) offspring [te/kna] of God—to the (one)s trusting in his name, those who, not out of blood, and not out of the will of (the) flesh, and not out of the will of man, but out of God, came to be (born) [e)gennh/qhsan].” (Jn 1:12-13)

In the Nicodemus-Discourse, this same language is used (by Jesus), describing believers coming to be born:

“if one should not come to be (born) [gennhqh=|] from above [a&nwqen], he is not able to see the kingdom of God” (3:3, cf. also v. 7)
“if one should not come to be (born) [gennhqh=|] out of water and (the) Spirit, he is not able to come into the kingdom of God” (3:5)

Coming to be born “from above” means the same as coming to be born “out of water and the Spirit”. As I have discussed elsewhere, I believe the emphasis in the expression in v. 5 is on a contrast between an ordinary human birth (“out of water”) and a spiritual birth (“out of the Spirit”)—i.e., a contrast between ordinary water and the living water of the Spirit (cf. 1:26, 33; 4:10-15; 7:37-39). Thus, from the Johannine theological standpoint, coming to be born “out of God” is the same as coming to be be born “out of the Spirit”. The believer is described as:

“every (one) having come to be (born) out of the Spirit” (3:8)
pa=$ o( gegennhme/no$ e)k tou= pneu/mato$

The accords fully with the usage in 1 John (3:9, first phrase), except that pneu=ma (“Spirit”) substitutes for qeo/$ (“God”), which is hardly surprising, given the theological declaration in Jn 4:24 that “God (is) Spirit” (pneu=ma o( qeo/$). Birth imagery also occurs in the Last Discourse (16:21), in the context of the coming of the Spirit (16:7b-15); and one may certainly interpret the initial giving of the Spirit (20:22) as a ‘new birth’ (a coming to be), in light of the rather clear allusion to Gen 2:7 (LXX e)ge/neto, “he became…”).

Returning to 1 Jn 3:9-10, the birth imagery is particularly emphasized within the syntax of the author’s statements. Consider first in verse 9:

    • “every (one) having come to be (born) out of God
      • does not do sin
        • His seed remains in him
      • he is not able to sin
    • he has come to be (born) out of God”

The initial transformation of coming to be born out of God, as his offspring (te/kna), is followed by the abiding presence of God’s seed (spe/rma) that remains in the believer. This abiding “seed” (of God’s holy Spirit) enables the believer to be holy and without sin (“not able to sin”). Again, however, it must be remembered that “sin,” in the Johannine sense, primarily refers to violation of the great dual-command (or duty, e)ntolh/) of trust and love. Principally, the latter component of love (a)ga/ph) is in view for the author, as vv. 10-11ff makes clear. The true believer cannot sin in this sense of hating (= not showing love to) another believer:

“every (one) not doing righteousness [= doing sin] is not [i.e. has not been born] out of God, and (so it is for) the (one) not loving his brother” (v. 10)

In vv. 11-18, the author further discusses this fundamental duty of the believer to love, framing it as a message given by Jesus “from the beginning” (v. 11), as a practical example of “walking in the light”, developing the light-vs-darkness motif of 1:5ff. Believers love each other, while the world hates believers (v. 13; cf. Jn 15:18-25; 17:14; cp. 7:7). In the view of the author, any supposed believer who does not show proper love to other believers (and to the Community of true believers), actually hates them, and thus behaves just like the non-believers and hostile opponents of God in the world. Love is a fundamental sign of the true believer:

“We have seen [i.e. known] that we have stepped across, out of death and into life [cf. Jn 5:24], (in) that we love the brothers; the (one) not loving (them) remains in death.” (v. 14)

True love—that is, the love possessed by the true believer—follows Jesus’ own example, corresponding to the sacrificial love which he showed in “laying down” his soul for believers (v. 16). This love ought to be demonstrated every day, in all sorts of practical ways (vv. 17-18), even as Jesus did for the first disciples. His love, which is God’s own love, remains in the true believer (Jn 15:9-10; 17:26; cf. 5:42; 13:35; 15:13; 1 Jn 2:15; 4:16-18) through the presence of the Spirit. Paul says much the same thing in Romans 5:5, and also describes in Galatians 5 how the practical fulfillment of the ‘love command’ (vv. 6, 13-15) is realized through the guidance of the Spirit (vv. 16ff). Paul’s idea of “walking about in the Spirit” (cp. Rom 6:4; 8:4) is essentially equivalent to the Johannine idiom of “walking about in the light” (1 Jn 1:7).

Finally, as we come to the concluding verses 19-24 of this central section, the author summarizes his discussion regarding the nature (and characteristics) of the true believer:

“[And] in this we shall know that we are out of [i.e. born of, belonging to] the truth, and in front of Him we shall persuade our heart…” (v. 19)

I would argue that the expression “out of the truth” (e)k th=$ a)lhqei/a$) is essentially a shorthand for the fuller phrase “coming to be (born) out of the truth”, in which case “the truth” is more or less synonymous with both “God” and “the Spirit”. The latter identification is confirmed by the bold declaration in 5:6: “the Spirit is the truth”. The idea of believers being ‘born of’ the truth, and belonging to the truth, is very much part of the Johannine theological idiom, with the same wording being used by Jesus in the Gospel:

“unto this [i.e. for this reason] I have come to be (born), and unto this I have come into the world, that I should give witness to the truth; every (one) being [i.e. who is] out of the truth [e)k th=$ a)lhqei/a$] hears my voice” (18:37)

The question that follows from Pilate (v. 38)— “What is (the) truth?” —receives its (belated) answer in 1 Jn 5:6: “The Spirit is the truth”. The Spirit, abiding in the (true) believer, teaches all things and guides the believer “in the way of all truth” (Jn 16:13). Through the Spirit, Jesus the Son—who also is the truth (14:6)—and God the Father, the source of all truth, abides in the believer. This assurance is referenced here in verse 20:

“…if our heart show know (something) against (us), (realize) that God is greater than our heart and knows all things”

Believers have this confidence before God, so as to ask of Him whatever we wish (cf. Jn 14:13-14; 15:7, 16; 16:23-24). His answer to our requests depends on our remaining in Him (through the Spirit). Under the Spirit’s guidance and teaching, we fulfill completely the two-fold duty (e)ntolh/) that is required of us as believers (v. 22). This duty is declared clearly and unmistakably in verse 23:

“And this is His e)ntolh/: that we should trust in the name of His Son Yeshua (the) Anointed, and should love each other, just as he gave (the) e)ntolh/ to us.”

Those who fulfill this duty will remain in God, and He in them:

“And the (one) keeping His e)ntolh/ remains [me/nei] in Him, and He (remains) in him…” (v. 24a)

All of this ultimately is realized through the presence of the Spirit:

“…and in this we know that He remains in us, out of the Spirit which He gave to us.” (v. 24b)

Jesus (the Son) gave believers the Spirit, but God the Father is the ultimate source; the Father gave the Spirit to the Son, so that he might give it, in turn, to believers (His children). Even though there are numerous references and allusions to the Spirit earlier in 1 John (as discussed in the previous notes and articles), this is the first explicit reference and occurrence of the word pneu=ma. It is surely significant the actual word is introduced here at this supremely climactic moment, at the heart of the author’s work, where he declares the nature and identity of the true believer in Christ.

Having gone through this study of the central section of 1 John (2:28-3:24), it should give us deeper insight as we turn to the second “antichrist” section (4:1-6), in the next article. It is here that the author begins to develop his contrast between true and false believers, dealing with the subject more directly in terms of the Johannine spiritualism and the role of the Spirit.

June 7: 1 John 2:29; 3:7bc

This note looks at the second of six parallel components in 1 John 2:28-3:10:

    • Initial exhortation, with the opening address “(my dear) offspring” (2:28; 3:7a)
    • Statement characterizing (true) believers as those who are righteous, and act rightly (2:29; 3:7bc)
    • Statement regarding the opposite—i.e. those who sin (3:4, 8a)
    • Statement regarding the purpose for Jesus coming to earth (as a human being) (3:5, 8b)
    • Statement to the effect that the (true) believer does/can not sin, and why (3:6a, 9)
    • Statement of the opposite—that the one sinning cannot be a true believer (3:6b, 10)

Cf. the previous note on component 1, and the introductory discussion on 3:6-9.

1 John 2:29 / 3:7bc
    • “If you have seen [i.e. known] that he is righteous, (then) you know that also every (one) doing righteousness has come to be (born) [gege/nnhtai] out of him.” (2:29)
    • “every (one) doing righteousness is righteous, even as that (one) [i.e. Jesus] is righteous” (3:7bc)

This statement expresses a fundamental (two-fold) principle of Johannine theology: (1) as Jesus is right(eous) [di/kaio$], so his true followers (believers) will be as well; and (2) the right-ness [dikaiosu/nh] of believers comes from that of Jesus himself, through our union with him. Here we also have the basic problem of how to translate the dikaio– word group, whether by “just/justice” or “right[eous]/righteousness”. Either way, we must, I think, here avoid the tendency of understanding dikaios[u/nh] in terms of conventional ethical-religious behavior. The author certainly would have taken for granted that true believers would think and act in a moral and upright manner; I doubt that is really at issue here, since, presumably, those who separated from the Community were quite moral (in the conventional sense) as well. Some commentators assume that they were licentious, but I find not the slightest hint of that in the letters. Moreover, it is worth noting that, throughout Church history, separatist groups and supposed ‘heretics’ have tended toward an ideal of ascetic purity much more so than toward flagrant immorality.

How, then, should we understand di/kaio$ and dikaoisu/nh here? We must look to the evidence of how these words are used elsewhere in the Johannine writings. They occur infrequently in the Gospel, but there is one key passage, 16:8-11, in the great Last Discourse, where Jesus is speaking of the work that the Spirit/Paraclete will do after his departure back to the Father. As it happens, sin (a(marti/a) and righteousness are juxtaposed in that passage, much as they are in 1 John 2:28-3:10:

“and, (at his) coming, that one [i.e. the Spirit/Paraclete] will show the world (to be wrong) about sin and about righteousness and about judgment: (on the one hand) about sin, (in) that they do not trust in me; (on the other) about righteousness, (in) that I go back to the Father and you (can) look at me no longer…”

Here sin is defined as failing (or refusing) to trust in Jesus; and, I would say, that right(eous)ness is similarly to be understood as the truth of who Jesus is. The work of the Spirit is described with the verb e)le/gxw, which has the basic meaning of “expose, show (someone) to be wrong,” sometimes in the judicial context of proving someone wrong, of exposing the guilt, etc, of someone—more precisely here, that of exposing the truth of the matter. Indeed, the Spirit is closely identified with Truth in the Johannine writings, being called “the Spirit of truth” in verse 13 (also 14:17; 15:26; and see 1 John 4:6; 5:6). The truth of Jesus’ identity is defined here by two phrases:

    • “I go back to the Father” — i.e., the raised/exalted Jesus’ return to the Father, confirming his identity as the Son.
    • “you see me no longer” — this is a shorthand way of referring to the time after his departure, in which the disciples will “see” Jesus only through the (invisible) presence of the Spirit. The abiding presence of the Spirit confirms the reality of who Jesus is, and marks the true believer.

Thus “sin” and “right(eous)ness” (dikaiosu/nh) here have a very specific and distinct meaning. The terms are not being used in the ordinary ethical-religious sense, but in a decidedly theological and Christological sense. What of the dikaio– word group elsewhere in the Johannine letters? The noun occurs only in our passage (2:29; 3:7, 10), but the adjective (di/kaio$) three other times in 1 John:

    • In 1:9 and 2:1, it is used as a title/attribute of Jesus, specifically in the context of his relation to the Father (as Son), with the power to cleanse/forgive sin. This is an importance point of emphasis which we will be exploring further.
    • In 3:12, immediately following our passage, it characterizes Abel in contrast to the evil of Cain. The two are brothers, and, as such, the illustration represents the contrast between true and false believers—another important point for our passage.

As in the earlier statement in 2:28, that in v. 29 is followed by an exposition with an eschatological emphasis, only much more extensive (3:1-3). It is beyond the scope of our study in this set of notes to examine these verses in detail, but the following brief points should be noted:

    • Believers are identified as “the offspring (i.e. children) of God”, essentially using the same noun (te/kna) as in the opening exhortations (2:28a; 3:7a, dim. tekni/a). This expounds the important Johannine verb genna/w (“come to be [born]”), used repeatedly as a way of identifying (true) believers as those who are born from God. This essential identity is in complete contrast to that of “the world [ko/smo$]”.
    • The identity of believers will not be realized fully until the end-time appearance of Jesus; currently, they/we experience him through the Spirit, but ultimately the union will be even more complete.

For more on the Paraclete-saying in Jn 16:7b-11, in its exposition of the words a(marti/a and dikaiosu/nh, cf. the article in the series “Spiritualism in the New Testament,” and the supplemental notes on the passage, esp. the notes on v. 9 and 10

Spiritualism and the New Testament: John: The Paraclete (4)

(The first Paraclete-saying [14:16-17] was discussed in the part 1 of this article; the second saying [14:25-26] in part 2.; the third [15:26-27] in part 3.)

Saying 4-5: John 16:7-15

The final Paraclete-saying(s) are found in the third (and final) discourse-division of the Last Discourse; on which, cf. again my outline:

    • 3:31-38—Introduction to the Discourse (cf. above)
    • 14:1-31—Discourse/division 1—Jesus’ departure
      • The relationship between Jesus and the Father (vv. 1-14)
      • Jesus’ Words for His Disciples (vv. 15-31)
    • 15:1-16:4a—Discourse/division 2—The Disciples in the World
      • Illustration of the Vine and Branches: Jesus and the Disciples (vv. 1-17)
      • Instruction and Exhortation: The Disciples and the World (15:18-16:4a)
    • 16:4b-28—Discourse/division 3—Jesus’ departure (farewell)
      • The Promise of the Spirit (vv. 4b-15)
      • Jesus’ Departure and Return (vv. 16-24)
      • Concluding statement by Jesus on his departure (vv. 25-28)
    • 16:29-33—Conclusion to the Discourse

The theme of the third discourse, as I define it, is the departure of Jesus and his farewell to his disciples. In many ways, this has been the theme of the Last Discourse as a whole, but is especially emphasized here. In the central section of the discourse (vv. 16-24), Jesus discusses his departure and return. The context of the preceding vv.4b-15, which contain the Paraclete-saying(s), makes clear that he is referring to his ultimate departure (back to the Father) and subsequent (eschatological) return. During this period, he will be present with the disciples (and all other believers) through the Spirit.

Some commentators would demarcate two distinct sayings in vv. 7-15 (in which case, these would be sayings # 4 and 5); however, in my view, it is better to treat vv. 7-15 here as a single unit—treating it as a more complex and expansive single Paraclete-saying. Even so, structurally, we may divine this section of the discourse into three parts:

    • The Promise of the Spirit (vv. 4b-15)
      • Initial statement by Jesus on his departure (vv. 4b-7a)
      • The Coming of the Spirit (vv. 7b-11)
      • Concluding statement by Jesus on his departure (vv. 12-15)

The Paraclete-saying covers the final two parts, anchored by the central reference (vv. 7b-11) to the coming of the Spirit (Paraclete). These verses have proven to be the most difficult to interpret of all the Paraclete-sayings, and among the most difficult portions of the Last Discourse as a whole. For this reason, I discuss vv. 7b-11 in detail through a set of supplemental (exegetical) daily notes.

As noted above, the Paraclete-saying must be understood in the immediate context of Jesus’ impending departure (back to the Father), vv. 4b-6. Because Jesus will no longer be physically present with the disciples, his continued presence must be spiritual—realized through the Spirit. In this regard, Jesus declares in v. 7 that it is actually beneficial for the disciples that he leaves them (physically):

“But I relate to you the truth: it bears together (well) for you that I should go away; for, if I should not go away, (then) the (one) called alongside [para/klhto$] will not come toward you…”

The verb sumfe/rw literally means “bear together”; in English idiom, we might say, things “come together” for a person’s advantage, suggesting a convergence of beneficial circumstances. Jesus will be able to minister to believers, in perpetuity, through the Spirit, in ways that he simply could not do within the limited scope of his earthly ministry. And, indeed, his departure (back to the Father) is required for the coming of the Spirit:

“…but if I (do) travel (off), I will send him toward you.”

The Spirit comes from God the Father, and Jesus (the Son) must request and receive the Spirit from the Father so as to be able to send it along to the disciples (and other believers). Verse 7 here continues the progression of the prior sayings in this regard (note the shift of focus from the Father to the Son):

    • The Father gives the Spirit, at Jesus’ request (14:16)
      • The Father sends the Spirit in Jesus’ name (14:26)
        • Jesus sends the Spirit from the Father (15:26)
          • Jesus (the Son) sends the Spirit (16:7b)

Elsewhere in the Gospel, it is clearly indicated (or alluded to) that Jesus gives the Spirit to believers (1:33; 7:37-39, cp. 4:10-15; 6:51, 63; 19:30, [34]; 20:22), even though the Father is the ultimate source of the Spirit (cf. 3:34-35; 4:24; 6:32; 17:8ff).

As in the first and third Paraclete-sayings, the “one called alongside” (para/klhto$) is referred to by the title “the Spirit of truth”. In discussing the third saying (cf. Part 3), I mentioned that here “truth” (a)lh/qeia) refers principally, and most specifically, to the truth about who Jesus is. This Christological emphasis continues here in the final saying. However, the emphasis is expressed in a curious way, especially in comparison to the rather straightforward reference in 15:26 to the Spirit as a witness about (peri/) Jesus (“about me [peri\ e)mou]”). Here is how the matter is stated in v. 8:

“and, (hav)ing come, that (one) will show the world (to be wrong), about a(marti/a, and about dikaiosu/nh, and about kri/si$.”

I have discussed this verse in a recent note, which I would recommend reading before continuing with this article.

The verb e)le/gxw has the basic meaning of “expose, show (to be wrong)”. The Spirit will show the world (o ( ko/smo$)—that is, the current world-order, dominated by sin and darkness—to be wrong about (peri/) three things in particular:

    • a(marti/a (“sin”) [v. 9, note]
    • dikaiosu/nh (“right[eous]ness”) [v. 10, note]
    • kri/si$ (“judgment”) [v. 11, note]

As the parallel with 15:26 suggests, the Spirit’s witness “about” (peri/) these things is fundamentally Christological—that is, it relates to, and is defined by, the witness about Jesus (“about me”). This is expounded in vv. 9-11, where the Spirit’s role in relation to each of the three terms of the triad in v. 8 is explained. I have discussed these verses in detail in the supplemental notes (cf. the links above), so I will be giving only a summary of that analysis here.

    • a(marti/a (“sin”)—Sin is defined, not as the world understands it, in a conventional ethical-religious sense, but principally in terms of trust (pi/sti$) in Jesus. From the Johannine theological standpoint, the great (and unforgivable) sin, of which the “world” is guilty, is an unwillingness to trust in Jesus as the Son of God.
    • dikaiosu/nh (“right[eous]ness”)—Again, true righteousness is not as the world understands or realizes it, but defined entirely by the righteousness of God (the Father) Himself, which is shared by, and manifest in, the person of the Son (Jesus). This righteousness follows the Son, in his exaltation and return to the Father, being otherwise invisible and hidden to the world. Only through the Spirit is this righteousness (of Father and Son) manifest, to believers.
    • kri/si$ (“judgment”)—The world also fails to understand the true nature of God’s judgment, in two main respects: (1) it is not limited to a future time, but is realized in the present; and (2) one experiences judgment based on whether one trusts and accepts the witness of who Jesus is. Those who trust in Jesus have already passed through the Judgment, while those who do not trust have, in a sense, already been judged (and condemned). Jesus may seem himself to have been judged by the world, under its authority, through his suffering and death; however, in reality, it is the world and its “Chief” (the Devil) that have been judged.

This witness by the Spirit, though it shows the world to be wrong, is directed primarily to the disciples (and other believers). This is clear from what follows in verses 12-15 (cf. the recent note). The theme of the Spirit’s teaching role is brought back into focus, from the earlier saying in 14:25-26 (cf. Part 2). The Spirit will continue Jesus’ role as teacher, continuing to teach believers (v. 12). The title “Spirit of truth [a)lh/qeia]” is particularly significant here, as Jesus declares that the Spirit with lead believers on the way [vb o(dhge/w] “in all the truth” (e)n th=| a)lhqei/a| pa/sh|). This association between the Spirit and truth reflects an important Johannine theme; indeed, the author of 1 John goes so far as to declare that “the Spirit is the truth” (5:6).

On the one hand, the Spirit becomes an additional link in the chain of relation: Father-Son-Believers. The Father gives to the Son, and the Son, in turn, gives to believers. He gives the Spirit to believers, and then, through the Spirit, he continues to give to believers. Thus, he gives the Spirit the words to speak, and the Spirit speaks, in Jesus’ name and on his behalf, to believers. This continues an important Johannine theme regarding the Son speaking the words of the Father (cf. the references in the supplemental note on vv. 12-15). The Son speaks only the words which he hears, and is given, by the Father. Jesus responds as a dutiful son, following his father’s example—he says (and does) what he hears (and sees) the Father saying (and doing).

At the same time, the Son (Jesus) is personally present with (and within) believers through the Spirit. It is truly he who speaks in and among believers. In this way, Jesus is able to continue teaching believers, as he still has “many (thing)s” to speak. Some commentators would limit this dynamic, applying it only to the original disciples. However, in my view, such a restriction distorts the message of the Last Discourse as a whole, and would contradict the thrust of the Johannine theology. In 1 John 2:20, 27, for example, which will be discussed in the next article of this series, it is rather clearly expressed that the Spirit continues to teach believers. This is an important aspect of Johannine spiritualism, and it will be explored further, and in considerable detail, in the studies on 1 John.

In verses 14-15, the Paraclete-sayings reach their theological (and Christological) conclusion, restating several fundamental Johannine themes. First, there is the contextual theme (in v. 14) relating to the exaltation of Jesus, utilizing the key-verb doca/zw (“show/give honor”). The “lifting up” and honoring of Jesus begins with his Passion (12:23, 28; 13:31-32; 17:1) and concludes with his receiving of the Spirit to give/send to believers. This entire process of exaltation, as expressed in the Johannine Gospel narrative, is characterized by the verb doca/zw (cf. 7:39; 12:16).

Second, the exaltation of Jesus is part of a more fundamental (and essential) dynamic relationship between Father and Son (on the use of doca/zw in this context, cf. 8:54; 14:13; 15:8; 17:1, 4-5). As noted above, the Spirit now becomes part of the fundamental chain of relation: the Father gives to the Son, who then gives to the Spirit, and the Spirit, in turn, now gives to believers.

Finally, the climactic verse 15 summarizes the core Johannine theological-Christological message (cf. especially 13:34-35; 17:7ff). As the Son sent to earth by God the Father, Jesus receives “all things” from the Father, so that he is able to give them, in turn, to believers. The Spirit is the foremost of what the Father gives to the Son, and which also the Son gives to believers. Through the Spirit, the Son will continue to give to believers. The focus is principally on Jesus’ words, his teaching, that he gives to believers; however, the theological formulation of the statement in v. 15 is more comprehensive than that. The Spirit receives from that which belongs to the Son—from the “all things” that the Father gives to the Son.

As a last point, the thematic emphasis of the great Prayer-Discourse of chapter 17 is also foreshadowed here, with an allusion to the unity between Father and Son: “all (thing)s, as (many) as the Father holds, are mine…”. In the Father’s giving to the Son, the Son shares in what belongs to the Father. Similarly, there is an allusion to believers’ unity with the Son (and the Father), since, through the Spirit, we (as believers) come to share in the things that belong to the Son. We must, however, emphasize again here that the communication of this to us takes place through the idiom of speaking and witnessing. The Spirit receives from what belongs to the Son and gives it forth as a message (vb a)nagge/llw) to us. The verbal aspect of this spiritual witness remains prominent throughout the Johannine writings, and is central to the Johannine spiritualism.

In the next article of this series, we shall begin to examine how the Johannine beliefs regarding the Spirit, as expressed in the Gospel, were realized in the wider Community. For this, we turn to the Johannine Letters, especially the work known as 1 John.

May 18: John 16:12ff

John 16:12-15

The Paraclete-saying in vv. 8-11 (discussed in the previous notes) continues in verses 12-15. Some commentators would treat these as two distinct units, however I prefer to consider vv. 7b-15 as a single Paraclete-unit. The main reason is that, in the prior three sayings (14:16-17, 25-26; 15:26-27), the statement on the coming of the “one called alongside” (para/klhto$) is followed by a reference to the parákl¢tos as “the Spirit of truth” (or “the holy Spirit”). Here, the parákl¢tos is called the “Spirit of truth” in verse 12, which strongly indicates that vv. 12-15 represents a continuation of the saying in vv. 7b-11, and that vv. 7b-15 constitutes a single saying, albeit expanded and more complex, according to the pattern in the Last Discourse.

The Spirit’s role and function was described in vv. 8-11: he will expose the world (o( ko/smo$), showing it to be wrong; this is fundamental meaning of the verb e)le/gxw, as previously discussed. The Spirit will show the world to be wrong on three points, each of which was discussed in some detail in the prior notes: (1) about “sin” (a(marti/a, note), (2) about “right[eous]ness” (dikaiosu/nh, note), and (3) about “judgment” (kri/si$, note). That the Spirit’s witness is aimed primarily at the disciples (believers), rather than directed at the world, is indicated by what follows in vv. 12-15. The world’s understanding of sin, righteous, and judgment is shown to be wrong, mainly for the benefit of believers. At the same time, believers (esp. the disciples) give witness toward the world, and the Spirit’s witness enables and guides them in this mission (cp. the Synoptic tradition in Mark 13:9-13 par, and throughout the book of Acts).

Thus it is that in vv. 12-15 the focus shifts back to the teaching function of the Spirit, emphasized in the second Paraclete-saying (14:25-26), an emphasis that is also reflected in the third saying (15:26f). In the articles on those sayings, I brought out the important point that the Spirit continues the mission of Jesus with his disciples (and future believers), and that Jesus is present, in and among believers, through the Spirit, continuing to speak and teach. This aspect of the Paraclete’s role is made particularly clear here in vv. 12ff, where Jesus begins:

“I have yet many (thing)s to relate to you, but you are not able to bear (them) now”

The verb he uses is basta/zw, which has the basic meaning of lifting something up and holding/supporting it. The disciples’ inability to “bear” Jesus’ teaching means that they are not yet ready to hear and understand what he has to say. The failure of the disciples to understand during the Last Discourse (e.g., 14:5, 8, 22) is part of a wider misunderstanding-motif that features throughout the Johannine Discourses. Jesus’ hearers are unable to understand the true and deeper meaning of his words. Only after the disciples have received the Spirit, will they be able to understand. Jesus still has “many (thing)s” to tell them, and he will communicate this further teaching through the Spirit:

“…but when that (one) should come, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you on the way in all truth; for he will not speak from himself, but (rather), as many (thing)s as he hears, he will speak, and the(se) coming (thing)s he will give forth as a message to you.” (v. 13)

The statement that the Spirit will guide believers “in all truth” corresponds to the claim  that the Spirit will teach them “all things”. In this regard, the identification of the Spirit-Paraclete by the title “the Spirit of truth” is particularly significant. The author of 1 John would take the connection a step further, declaring that the Spirit is the truth (5:6). For more on the expression “Spirit of truth,” cf. the article on the first Paraclete-saying.

Some commentators would limit these Paraclete-sayings in application to the original disciples, but such a restriction runs counter to the overall thrust of the Last Discourse, as well as to the Johannine theological-spiritual understanding. The Spirit continues to teach believers “all things”, as is clear from 1 Jn 2:20, 27 (to be discussed in the series “Spiritualism and the New Testament”). The focus in the narrative is, however, primarily upon the original disciples of Jesus, who are the first believers to receive the Spirit and to continue Jesus’ mission on earth.

The (correlative) neuter plural pronoun o%sa (“as many [thing]s as”) relates back to the neuter plural adjective polla/ (“many [thing]s”) in v. 12. The Spirit will hear the “many (thing)s” that Jesus has to say to believers, and will then speak them, on Jesus’ behalf; effectively, Jesus will be speaking through the Spirit, even as he will be present alongside believers through the Spirit. Interestingly, the statement in v. 12 (cf. above) seems, on the surface, to contradict what Jesus said in 14:30; note the formal similarity in expression:

    • “not yet [ou)ke/ti] many (thing)s [polla/] will I speak [lalh/sw] with/to you” (14:30)
    • “yet [e&ti] many (thing)s [polla/] I have to say [le/gein] to you” (16:12)

This is another example of double-meaning in the Johannine discourses—where Jesus’ words can be understood on two different levels, or in two different ways. On the one hand, Jesus will not yet speak “many things” to his disciples, since he will not be present with them (on earth) much longer; but, on the other hand, he will yet say “many things” to them through the Spirit.

This chain of relation, between the Son (Jesus) and the Spirit, is given in verse 14, expressed very much in the Johannine theological idiom:

“That (one) will show me honor, (in) that he will receive out of th(at which is) mine and will give (it) forth as a message to you.”

The Spirit receives the words from Jesus, and gives them along to believers. This corresponds to the relationship between Father and Son, whereby the Son (Jesus) receives from the Father, and then gives it, in turn, to believers. The Spirit represents, in one sense, a further link in this chain; at the same time, Jesus himself is manifest in the Spirit, just as the Father is personally manifest in him (the Son). An important emphasis throughout the Gospel is how Jesus speaks the words he receives from the Father; in this regard, he is functioning as a dutiful son learning from his father and following the father’s example—i.e., the Son says (and does) what he hears (and sees) the Father saying (and doing). On this important theme, see esp. 3:31-34; 5:19ff, 30ff; 7:17-18; 8:26, 28, 38ff; 12:49f; 14:10; 15:15; 17:8, 14.

The Son speaks only what he hears from the Father; similarly, the Spirit speaks only what he hears from the Son. The precise expression is that he will receive “out [i.e. from] of th(at which is) mine” (e)k tou= e)mou=). Since the Father has given “all things” to the Son (3:35; 17:7, etc), the words of God which the Spirit receives come from the Son, and belong to him. In my view, the neuter plural participle (verbal noun) ta\ e)rxo/mena (“the coming [thing]s”) in v. 13 refers, not to news of future events, but simply to the words/teachings that are “coming” to the Spirit from the Son (the verb e&rxomai tends to have this Christological focus in the Gospel of John). The neuter plural has a general and comprehensive meaning, corresponding to the plural adjective poll/a (“all things”) in v. 12 (cf. above).

The disciples’ receiving of the Spirit marks the final stage of Jesus’ exaltation. The process of the Son being honored (vb doca/zw), which began with his Passion (cf. 12:23, 28), culminates in his receiving the Spirit from the Father to give to believers. The entire narrative of exaltation, from Jesus’ earthly suffering to communicating the Spirit from heaven, is characterized by the verb doca/zw (cf. 7:39; 12:16, etc).

“All (thing)s [pa/nta], as many as [o%sa] the Father holds, are mine; through this [i.e. for this reason] I said that he receives out of th(at which is) mine and will give (it) forth as a message to you.” (v. 15)

Verse 15 summarizes the theological message of the passage, stating quite clearly the key points of the Johannine theology which I have noted above. The neuter plural adjective pa/nta (“all [thing]s”) corresponds to the polla/ (“many [thing]s”) in v. 12, and the (correlative) neuter plural pronoun o%sa (“as many [thing]s as”) is repeated from v. 13. The adjective pa=$ (“all, every”) plays an important theological role in the Gospel; special attention should be given to other occurrences of the neuter (“every [thing], all [thing]s”)—cf. 1:3; 3:31, 35; 5:20; 6:37, 39; 10:4; 14:26; 16:30; 17:2, 7, 10; 18:4; 19:28.

May 15: John 16:11

John 16:11

In verse 11, we have the third (and final) item of the triad in the Paraclete-saying of v. 8:

“that (one) will show the world (to be wrong)…about judgment [kri/si$]”

In the previous notes on v. 9 and 10, two key points were established: (1) the Spirit will show the world to be wrong in its understanding (of sin and righteousness), and that (2) the true nature of sin and righteousness is to be understood in Christological terms—that is, in relation to Jesus’ identity as the Son sent (from heaven) by God the Father. The same two points apply to the final statement regarding judgment (kri/si$).

The noun kri/si$ fundamentally refers to a separation, often in the sense of discerning or making a decision about something. It is typically translated “judgment”, either in this general sense, or within the specific legal-judicial context of a decision rendered in a court of law (by a judge). For the most part, in the Gospel of John, as throughout the New Testament, kri/si$ specifically refers to the coming end-time (eschatological) Judgment, when God will judge the world, punishing humankind for its wickedness.

The noun occurs 11 times in the Gospel (out of 47 NT occurrences), and once in 1 John (4:17); the related verb (kri/nw) occurs 19 times in the Gospel, but not in the Letters. Occasionally, the more general sense of judgment is intended (cf. 7:24), or kri/si$/kri/nw is used in an ordinary legal-judicial context (7:51; 18:31); however, as noted above, primarily the reference is to the coming end-time Judgment (see esp. 5:29-30; 12:31, 48; 1 Jn 4:17).

Even though the eschatological context is primary, this is presented in a very distinctive way in the Gospel Discourses. At several points, we find signs of what is called “realized” eschatology—that is, the idea that end-time events, such as the resurrection and the Last Judgment, are understood as having, in a sense, already occurred, being realized in the present. This does not mean that the Gospel writer (or Jesus as the speaker) denies a future fulfillment, but only affirms that it is also fulfilled in the present. This is seen most clearly in the chapter 5 Discourse, where the resurrection is defined, not simply as a future event, but as realized in the present, through the presence of the Son of God (Jesus)—vv. 25ff; cp. 11:25-26. In terms of salvation from the coming Judgment, this is realized for believers (in the present), through their/our trust in Jesus:

“the (one) hearing my word, and trusting in the (One hav)ing sent me, holds (the) life of the ages [i.e. eternal life], and does not come into judgment, but has stepped over, out of death, (and) into life.” (5:24)

If believers are saved from judgment in the present, through trust, then unbelievers correspondingly come under God’s judgment, having the judgment (already) passed against them (in the present), through their lack of trust. The key passage alluding to this is 3:19-21; cf. also 9:41; 15:22-24. In the wider Gospel tradition, the end-time period of distress, seen as the beginnings of the Judgment, commences with the suffering and death of Jesus (see, e.g., Mark 14:38-41 par, and the context of the “Eschatological Discourse” [chap. 13 par]). The Johannine tradition evinces the same basic eschatological view, and this is confirmed by Jesus’ declaration in 12:31, and is strongly implied throughout the Last Discourse.

The explanation of the Paraclete-saying in v. 8 concludes with the words of Jesus in v. 11:

“…and about judgment, (in) that the Chief of this world has been judged”

The perfect tense of the verb kri/nw (ke/kritai, passive, “he has been judged”) indicates a past event, the effect of which continues in the present. The implication is that the “chief of this world” has already been judged, just as believers have already passed through [perfect form of the vb metabai/nw] the Judgment (5:24, cf. above).

The expression “the chief of this world” (o( a&rxwn tou= ko/smou tou=tou) occurred earlier the 12:31 declaration:

“Now is (the) judgment of this world, now the Chief of this world shall be cast out!”

The idea expressed is very close to that here in v. 11: “shall be cast out” (future tense) is parallel with “has been judged” (perfect tense). Essentially the same expression was used earlier in the Last Discourse, at the close of the first discourse (14:30f):

“Not much more shall I speak with you, for the Chief of the world comes, and he does not hold anything on me, but (this is so) that the world would know that I love the Father, and, just as He laid on me (a duty) to complete, so I do (it).”

This is a rather complicated way for Jesus to refer to his impending suffering (and death). The approach of the “Chief of the world” signifies the world’s role, under the dominion of its “Chief”, in putting Jesus to death. The point is strongly made that this does not mean that the world (or its Chief) has any power over Jesus, or has anything incriminating on him (deserving of death)—cf. Jesus’ words to Pilate in 19:11, and note the emphasis in 10:18. In his own way, Pilate is one of the world’s “chiefs”, though ultimately subservient to the dominion/control of its main Chief (the Devil). Jesus’ suffering and death will happen so that everyone (“the world,” in a more generic sense) will know of the love between Father and Son, and that the Son (Jesus) is simply fulfilling the duty and mission given to him by the Father.

In speaking of the “coming” of the world’s Chief, coinciding with the onset of Jesus’ Passion, one is reminded of the Synoptic Garden scene, when Jesus announces to his close disciples that “the hour (has) come [h@lqen h( w%ra]” (Mark 14:41 par; cp. Jn 12:23, 27 in connection with v. 31). In the Lukan version (22:53), this declaration is given more vivid and personal form:

“…but this is your hour, and the authority [e)cousi/a] of darkness”

In many ways, this language approaches the Johannine theme of the world’s opposition to Jesus; the plural “you” essentially refers to those people, hostile to Jesus, who belong to the current world-order (ko/smo$) of darkness and evil. Functionally, they are servants of the Devil, the “Chief” of the world.

According to the world’s view of things, Jesus was judged and punished by the world’s authority; yet this view of judgment (kri/si$) is decidedly wrong. Jesus’ suffering and death actually marks the beginning of his exaltation—of his being “lifted up” (as the Son of God) in glory. While it might appear as though Jesus was judged, it was actually the world (and its Chief) that underwent judgment. This is the true nature of judgment that the Spirit will bring to light, exposing the false understanding of the world. Jesus himself declared the true situation at the close of the Last Discourse (16:33):

“…in the world you have distress, but you must take courage, (for) I have been victorious (over) the world!”

Again a perfect tense form (neni/khka, “I have been victorious”) shows how the future (eschatological) event of the Judgment is realized in the present. That Jesus’ victory over the world includes the “Chief of the world” —something already alluded to in 12:31—is confirmed by the author of 1 John:

“Unto this [i.e. for this purpose] the Son of God was made to shine forth [i.e. appear on earth], that he should dissolve [i.e. destroy] the works of the {Devil}.” (3:8)

The mission of the Son on earth, culminating in his death, had the purpose (and effect) of destroying the ‘works’ (implying dominion/control) of the Devil. This is another way of stating that, with the death of Jesus, the “Chief of the world” has been judged.

Another way that the world is wrong about judgment relates to the future expectation of the end-time (Last) Judgment. The conventional religious view was that only at the end time, in the future (however immediate or far off), would God judge the world—judging human beings for their ethical and religious behavior. In two respects, the Gospel of John presents a very different perspective on the great Judgment: (1) the Judgment is effectively realized in the present, based on whether or not one trusts in Jesus (as the Son of God), and (2) people are judged ultimately, and principally, on their response to the witness regarding Jesus identity (as the Son). This ‘realized’ eschatological emphasis in the Johannine writings (esp. the Gospel) was discussed above, but it is worth mentioning again here. Point (2) has already been addressed in the prior notes (on v. 9 and 10), but, in this regard, the Christological emphasis of the Paraclete-saying cannot be overstated.

In the next daily note, our analysis of vv. 8-11 will be summarized, along with some exegetical comments on the following vv. 12-15.

May 13: John 16:10

John 16:10

Verse 10 highlights the second noun of the triad in v. 8 (cf. the prior note)—dikaiosu/nh:

“and that (one) will show the world (to be wrong)…about dikaiosu/nh…”

On the contextual meaning of the verb e)le/gxw, here translated as “show (to be wrong)”, cf. the prior note.

The Spirit will show the world to be wrong about dikaiosu/nh. This noun literally means “right-ness”, the closest approximation for which in English is “righteousness”, though in certain instances “justice” is perhaps a more appropriate translation. The noun is relatively rare in the Johannine writings; it occurs only here (vv. 8, 10) in the Gospel, and three times in 1 John.

The usage in 1 John may help to elucidate the meaning of the word in the Gospel. The context within the statements of 2:29, 3:7 and 10 is very similar:

“If you have seen that He is right(eous) [di/kaio$], (the) you know also that every (one) doing right(eous)ness [dikaiosu/nh] has come to be born out of Him.” [2:29]
“(Dear) offspring, let no one lead you astray: the (one) doing right(eous)ness is right(eous), just as that (One) is right(eous).” [3:7]
“In this is made to shine forth the offspring of God and the offspring of the {Devil}: every (one) not doing right(eous)ness is not out of God…” [3:10]

Righteousness is clearly related to the characteristic of God the Father as righteous (di/kaio$), an attribute that is also shared by the Son (Jesus), cf. 1:9; 2:1. Believers who are united with the Son (and thus also the Father) through the Spirit, likewise share this characteristic. And so, they will do what is right, following the example of Jesus (and of God the Father). In so doing, they will demonstrate that they have been ‘born’ of God.

This strong theological usage, within the Johannine idiom, informs the use of dikaiosu/nh here in the Paraclete saying (16:8): “that (one) [i.e. the Spirit] will show the world (to be wrong) about right(eous)ness [peri\ dikaiosu/nh$]”. Jesus expounds what is meant by this in verse 10:

“…and about right(eous)ness, (in) that I lead (myself) under toward the Father and not any (more) do you look at me”

On the surface, Jesus simply re-states what he has been saying throughout the Last Discourse—that he will soon be going away, back to the Father. This is most frequently expressed by the verb u(pa/gw, which literally means something like “lead (oneself) under,” i.e., going ‘undercover,’ disappearing, often used in the more general sense of “go away, go back”. It occurs quite often in the Gospel of John (32 times out of 79 NT occurrences), where it typically is used, by Jesus, to refer to his departure back to the Father. Properly construed, this ‘going away’ is part of the process of Jesus’ exaltation, of his being “lifted up” —a process that begins with his death, and ends with his return to the Father. The references to Jesus’ departure have a dual-meaning in the Last Discourse, referring to both ends of that spectrum.

The verb qewre/w, one of several key verbs in the Gospel expressing the idea of seeing, also has a double-meaning. It denotes “looking (closely) at” something (or someone), and occurs 24 times in the Gospel (out of 58 NT occurrences). Theologically it can signify seeing Jesus, in the sense of recognizing his true identity (as the Son sent by the Father), cf. 12:45, etc; yet, it also can refer to simple (physical) sight. Throughout the Last Discourse, there is conceptual wordplay between both of these meanings, and, not coincidentally, the references relate contextually to the Paraclete-sayings—14:17, 19; 16:16-17, 19. Here, qewre/w refers principally to the idea that Jesus will no longer be visible to the disciples, because he will no longer be physically present with them.

The context of the Spirit’s witness against the world here makes the similar language in 14:19 quite relevant:

“Yet a little (longer), and the world will not look at [qewrei=] me any (more); but you will look at [qewrei=te] me, (and in) that I live, you also shall live.”

Jesus seems to be alluding to his resurrection (and return to the disciples) after his death, when people will (for a time) not see him. However, the theological meaning of qewre/w is also prevalent—i.e., the “world” will not see Jesus (especially in his death) for who he truly is, the Son of God; but the disciples will recognize and trust in him.

This brings us to the statement in 16:10, which has always been something of a puzzle. Commentators have found difficulty in explaining how Jesus’ explanation relates to the Paraclete saying. How does the Spirit show the world to be wrong about righteousness specifically because (o%ti) Jesus departs to the Father (and the disciples can no longer see him)?

In the previous note (on v. 9), I mentioned how the Spirit’s role in exposing (vb e)le/gxw) the world “about sin”, refers, not only to the world’s actual sin (of unbelief), but to its understanding of the nature of sin. As I have discussed, in the Johannine writings sin refers principally to the great sin of failing/refusing to trust in Jesus, of not recognizing his identity as the Son sent from heaven by God the Father. I would argue that the nature of righteousness (dikaiosu/nh) has a similarly Christological orientation in the Johannine writings.

This would seem to be confirmed by the references in 1 John, discussed above. Jesus (the Son) is righteous (di/kaio$), just as the Father is righteous—he shares the same attribute with the Father. True righteousness, thus, is not as the world understands it—in conventional ethical and religious terms—but, rather, in terms of Jesus’ identity as the Son, who manifests and embodies the truth of the Father. Thus, the emphasis here in v. 10—as, indeed, it is throughout the Last Discourse—is on Jesus’ return to the Father. His return, to his heavenly/eternal place of origin, provides the ultimate confirmation of his identity as the Son (and Righteous One) of God.

It is also possible that there is an allusion here to a ‘false’ righteousness possessed (and valued) by the world, which corresponds precisely with their great sin (of unbelief). In this regard, it is worth noting several instances in the LXX and NT, where dikaiosu/nh is used in a negative sense, or where such is implied—Isa 64:6; Dan 9:18; Rom. 10:3; Phil. 3:6-9; one may also mention the implicit contrast between the righteousness of the “scribes and Pharisees” and that of Jesus’ faithful disciples (Matt 5:20). Cf. the article by D. A. Carson, “The Function of the Paraclete in John 16.7-11”, Journal of Biblical Literature [JBL] 98 (1979), pp. 547-66 [esp. 558-60].

It is fair to say that the Spirit will both prove the world to be wrong in its understanding of true righteousness, and will expose the false righteousness that it holds. The connection with the disciples not being able to see Jesus—meaning Jesus will no longer be present alongside them physically—may be intended, in a subtle way, to emphasize the invisible nature of true righteousness. It is hidden to the world, and to people at large, since it is manifest principally through the Spirit. Only true believers can participate in this righteousness, through spiritual union with the Son (Jesus) and the Father. The effect and evidence of righteousness may be visible to all (cp. the saying in 3:8), but its true nature is invisible, being spiritual in nature, just as God Himself is Spirit (4:23).

May 12: John 16:9

John 16:9

As discussed in the previous note, verse 8 describes the role of the Spirit (the para/klhto$) as that of exposing/showing (vb e)le/gxw) the world (ko/smo$) to be wrong. He will show the world to be wrong about (peri/) three things in particular, expressed by a triad of nouns:

    • about a(marti/a (v. 9)
    • about dikaiosu/nh (v. 10)
    • about kri/si$ (v. 11)

Of these three, the meaning of the first (a(marti/a) is most straightforward, being understood (and translated) generally as “sin”. Thus the statement in verse 8 reads: “and that (one) will show the world (to be wrong) about sin [peri\ a(marti/a$]…”.

However, sin (a(marti/a, vb a(marta/nw) has a very distinct meaning and significance in the Johannine writings. While not ignoring or denying the conventional ethical-religious meaning (cf. 5:14; 9:2-3ff; 20:23), the word (and concept) is very much defined in Christological terms, informed by its use in the Johannine theological context. We can see this most particularly by the explanation given (by Jesus) in verse 9:

“about sin, (on the one hand,) (in) that they do not trust in me“

The exposition in vv. 9-11 is governed syntactically by a me\n…de/… construction (“on the one hand…on the other…”). Here the particle me/n indicates the first item of the triad—three parts of a witness the Spirit gives against the world.

Sin is clearly identified here with a failure to trust (vb pisteu/w) in Jesus. People (i.e., those belonging to “the world”) are unwilling or unable to recognize the truth about who Jesus is, and thus do not trust in him. The main section in the Gospel dealing with the question of sin is section 8:21-30 of the great Sukkot Discourse-complex in chapters 7-8. In verse 21, Jesus first states the matter in a rather puzzling way:

“I go away, and you will seek me, and (yet) in your sin you will die off—for, (to the place) where I go away, you are not able to come.”

Throughout this discourse, as in the Last Discourse, Jesus plays on a double-meaning of the idea that he is “going away” (vb u(pa/gw). At the level of the world (that is, his hostile audience in the Sukkot Discourse), the reference is simply to Jesus having gone off somewhere (to another geographical location, cf. 7:35-36). However, according to the true meaning of Jesus’ words, he is returning back to the Father, indicating his Divine/heavenly origin as the Son of God. The world cannot find him, because he will not have gone away to another physical place, but to a spiritual place (4:23)—back to the Father.

On the surface, Jesus’ statement that unbelievers will die in their sin suggests that here a(marti/a is being used in its ethical-religious sense. By rejecting Jesus, they will not find forgiveness for their moral and religious failings and wicked behavior. Certainly, the Gospel does indicate that Jesus’ earthly mission, and his sacrificial death, was intended to “take away” the world’s sins (1:29). The author of 1 John makes clear that, by our participation in the death of Jesus, the cleansing power of his “blood”, communicated through the Spirit (cf. Jn 6:51-58, 63), does ‘take away’ our sin (1 Jn 1:7ff, discussed in a recent note).

However, the expression “in your sin”, lit. “in the sin of you” (e)n th=| a(marti/a| u(mw=n), can be understood another way—viz., as referring to the great sin of unbelief. Jesus’ opponents will die in this sin. Verses 23-24 demonstrate, indeed, how the expression is to be understood, within the Johannine theological idiom:

“You are out of [i.e. from] the (place) below [ka/tw], I am out of [i.e. from] the (place) above [a&nw]; you are out of [i.e. from] this world, I am not out of [i.e. from] this world. So I said to you that you will die off in your sins; for, if you would not trust that I am [e)gw\ ei)mi], you will die off in your sins.”

The expression “in your sins [plur.]” here is defined in terms of “in your sin [sing.]”. All other sins are secondary to, and ultimately relate back to, the great sin of unbelief. The essential predicative expression “I am” (e)gw\ ei)mi) is fundamental to the Johannine theology, occurring repeatedly throughout the Gospel. The reason why Jesus’ opponents will die ‘in their sins’ is because they are ‘in the (great) sin’ of unbelief; that is, they refuse to trust in Jesus, recognizing and accepting his identity as the Divine Son (with the attribute of “I Am”) sent by the Father.

The Spirit will expose the true nature of the world’s sin. Showing the world to be wrong “about sin” can be understood on two levels. First, the world’s understanding about the nature of sin (in general) is shown to be wrong. According to the world’s standards, a person may appear to be living in a moral and upright manner—like, to be sure, many of the religious leaders who were hostile to Jesus—and yet still commit the great sin of rejecting God’s Son.

When people encounter the witness as to who Jesus is, their own true identity is exposed and made known. If they belong to God, they will be drawn to the light, and will trust in Jesus; if they belong to the world (which is opposed to God), they will be shown to be hostile to the light, lovers of darkness, and will not trust in him. This witness (of the Spirit) exposes and reveals the world’s sin, and brings it under judgment; Jesus’ own witness, during his earthly ministry, did the same thing (cf. 3:19-21; 15:22ff [cp. 9:41]), and now the Spirit is continuing his work of bearing witness.

Thus, the second meaning of “about sin” relates to the world’s sin. This is the great sin of unbelief—refusing to trust in Jesus—and it shows that those who belong to the world, being lovers of darkness, are steeped in various kinds of sin, which cannot (and will not) be forgiven, because of their unbelief. The cleansing power of Jesus’ blood (1 Jn 1:7, cf. above) is only communicated to believers, those who belong to God, through the abiding presence of the Spirit.

In the next daily note, we will turn to the second item of the triad— “about rightness” (peri\ dikaiosu/nh$)—and how this is explained in verse 10.

*    *    *    *    *

As an interesting side note, the idea of a person’s true nature, and of the sinfulness of their heart, being exposed by the Spirit is also found in the Jewish Testament of Judah (part of the “Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs”), chapter 20. It utilizes the same expression, “Spirit of truth”, as the Johannine Paraclete-sayings. As previously noted, the same expression occurs in the Qumran Community Rule text (1QS 3:18-29; 4:21), and the contextual usage in the Testament of Judah is very similar:

“The things of truth and the things of error are written in the affections of man, each one of whom the Lord knows. There is no moment in which man’s works can be concealed, because they are written on the heart in the Lord’s sight. And the spirit of truth testifies to all things and brings all accusations. He who has sinned is consumed in his heart and cannot raise his head to face the judge.” (20:3-5, translation by H. C. Kee, Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, Charlesworth ed. [Anchor Bible Reference Library]).